Case law

Aziken v. District of Columbia

70 A.3d 213 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 20, 2013

In 2008, the District of Columbia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board (the “ABC Board”) revoked the club's liquor license. See Aziken, 29 A.3d at 968 . . … Co. v.

Head v. Robinson

494 A.2d 1305 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 28, 1985

See Stevens v. do. [Stevens], 346 So.2d 909 (Miss.1977); People ex rel Klee v. Klee, 202 App.Div. 592, 195 NYS 778 (1922); Ex parte Kelly, 261 P.2d 452 (Okla.1953); Buchanan v. do. … See generally Brown v. Dyer, 489 A.2d 1081 (D.C.1985), and Clark v. Clark, 485 A.2d 621 (D.C.1984).

FRIENDS OF MCMILLAN PARK, MCMILLAN COALITION FOR SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE, and DC FOR REASONABLE DEVELOPMENT v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ZONING COMMISSION and MAYOR'S AGENT FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION, and VISION MCMILLAN PARTNERS, LLC, Intervenor.

149 A.3d 1027 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 8, 2016

League v. … League v.

Napier v. Safeway Stores, Inc.

215 A.2d 479 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 23, 1965

Giant Food Stores, Inc. v. Bowling, D.C.App., 202 A.2d 783 (1964). 2 . Preston v. Safeway Stores, Inc., D.C., 163 F.Supp. 749 , aff’d, 106 U.S.App.D.C. 114 , 269 F.2d 781 (1959). 3 . Brown v. … Orum v. Safeway Stores, Inc., D.C.Mun.App., 138 A.2d 665, 666 (1958). 6 . See Orum v. Safeway Stores, Inc., supra, note 5.

In re P. A. S.

434 A.2d 461 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 13, 1981

Byrd v. United States, D.C.App., 388 A.2d 1225, 1229 *463 (1978); Marshall v. United States, D.C.App., 340 A.2d 805, 808 (1975); Curley v. … Brown v. United States, D.C. App., 304 A.2d 21 (1973). [Charles v. United States, D.C.App., 371 A.2d 404, 406 (1977).] Moreover, that the stolen property had some real value to the owner must also be shown. Jones v.

Daniels v. Director of Vehicles & Traffic of D. of C.

143 A.2d 95 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 20, 1958

For an explanation of the “point system” see Traffic and Motor Vehicle Reg *96 ulations for the District of Columbia, Part V; Lambert v. Board of Com’rs of District of Columbia, D.C.Mun.App., 116 A.2d 926 . 2 . Ritch v.

Welch v. United States

689 A.2d 1 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 25, 1996

United States v. Woodfolk, 656 A.2d 1145, 1150 (D.C.1995) (citing Price v. United States, 545 A.2d 1219, 1226 (D.C.1988)); see also Nicholson v. United States, 368 A.2d 561, 564 (D.C.1977). … Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 669 , 104 S.Ct. 2052, 2055 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). See also Ready v. United States, 620 A.2d 233, 234 (D.C.1993).

Johnson v. United States

40 A.3d 1 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 22, 2012

Dickerson v. United States, 677 A.2d 509, 512 (D.C.1996) (citing Brown v. United States, 590 A.2d 1008, 1020 (D.C.1991)). … (quoting Texas v. Brown, 460 U.S. 730, 742 , 103 S.Ct. 1535 , 75 L.Ed.2d 502 (1983) (plurality opinion) (alteration in original)).

Bueno v. United States

761 A.2d 856 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 9, 2000

In Hicks v. … United States v.

Moore v. Waller

930 A.2d 176 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 2, 2007

v. … Anderson v.

Bingham v. Goldberg. Marchesano. Kohlman. Inc.

637 A.2d 81 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Feb 3, 1994

The undisputed testimony shows that final decision-making authority rested with the Board of Directors of the corporation, and it was the Board’s decision to terminate publication of the paper. … See Stansel v. American Sec.

Columbia Realty Venture v. District of Columbia Rental Housing Commission

590 A.2d 1043 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 15, 1991

E.g., Levy v. District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustment, 570 A.2d 739, 746 (D.C.1990); George Washington University v. District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustment, 429 A.2d 1342, 1348 (D.C.1981). … Perkins v.

In re Neeb

964 A.2d 1278 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 22, 2009

consideration of the certified copy of the order issued by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania suspending respondent by consent for one year and one day coupled with a fitness requirement, See Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. … in our Rule XI, § 16(d).”); In re Powell, 860 A.2d 836, 837 (D.C.2004) (Because District of Columbia attorneys are obligated to notify the Secretary of the Bar of any change of address within 30 days of such change, the Board

Helen White v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services

120 A.3d 615 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 23, 2015

We concluded otherwise, however, in Placido v. … See, e.g., Butler- Truesdale v.

Shanklin v. Bender

283 A.2d 651 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 15, 1971

See generally Mouldings Division of Thompson Ind. v. Review Board, 122 Ind.App. 497 , 106 N.E.2d 402 (1952); Hendershot v. … See Hartley v. Vitiello, supra, Mouldings Division of Thompson Ind. v. Review Board, supra.

In re Venable

641 A.2d 853 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 22, 1993

In its Report and Recommendation, the Board on Professional Responsibility concluded that the offense of which Venable was convicted involves moral turpitude per se, and recommended disbarment. … North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 , 91 S.Ct. 160 , 27 L.Ed.2d 162 (1970). . We direct respondent’s attention to D.C.Bar R.

Hampleton v. United States

10 A.3d 137 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 23, 2010

Jones v. United States, 972 A.2d 821, 824 (D.C.2009); see also Brown v. United States, 590 A.2d 1008, 1020 (D.C.1991). … Turner, 699 A.2d at 1128 -29 (citing Brown v. United States, 590 A.2d at 1017 ).

Millet v. United States

977 A.2d 932 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 13, 2009

App D.C. 30, 32-33, 483 F.3d 836, 838-839 (2007) (en banc) (citing Rawlings and other cases); United States v. Brown, 150 U.S.App. … Brown , 150 U.S.App. D.C. at 114, 463 F.2d at 950 (citations omitted; emphasis in original). 4 . See United States v. Adell, 676 A.2d 446 (D.C. 1996). 5 .

Tillman v. Director of Vehicles & Traffic

144 A.2d 922 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 2, 1958

[Citing National Labor Relations Board v. Indiana & Michigan Elec. Co., 318 U.S. 9, 28 , 63 S.Ct. 394 , 87 L.Ed. 579 .] The requirements of a fair hearing are dependent upon the nature and purpose of the hearing itself. … See Daniels v. Director of Vehicles & Traffic of Dist. of Columbia, D.C.Mun.App., 143 A.2d 95 ; Ritch v. Director of Vehicles & Traffic of Dist. of Columbia, supra. 3 . See Chappelle v.

Matthews v. United States

629 A.2d 1185 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 26, 1993

Givens and appellant reemerged about half an hour later with three plastic garbage bags and a brown leather bag; appellant was carrying two of the plastic bags. … He was unsure whether appellant ever saw the body, which was covered with a board. 10 .