Case law

Harten v. Loffler

29 App. D.C. 490 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 7, 1907

See Mead v. Parker, 115 Mass. 415 , 15 Am. Rep. 110 ; Slater v. Smith, 117 Mass. 98 ; Farmer v. Batts, 83 N. C. 392 . … Browne, Stat.' Er. sec. 409. Nor was there any variance between the contract offered in evidence and that declared on. Warfield v. Booth, 33 Md. 63 .

District of Columbia v. Fremeau

869 A.2d 711 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 10, 2005

Police Dep’t v. Broadus, 560 A.2d 501, 504 (D.C.1989) (quoting Stokes v. District of Columbia, 502 A.2d 1006, 1010 (D.C.1985)) (internal quotation marks omitted). … Hosp. v. District of Columbia Office of Employee Appeals, 548 A.2d 70, 74 (D.C.1988) (quoting United States v. L.A.

Smith v. United States

414 A.2d 1189 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 30, 1980

In Johnson v. United States, D.C.App., 398 A.2d 354 (1979), this court discussed at length the doctrine of judicial discretion and appellate review thereof. … Id. at 365 , citing among other authorities, Brown v. Allen, 344 U.S. 443, 496 , 73 S.Ct. 397, 441 , 97 L.Ed. 469 (1953).

Bedney v. United States

684 A.2d 759 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 24, 1996

In rebuttal, the government presented the testimony of Rhonda Brown, the manager of the James Apartments at 1425 N Street, N.W. Ms. … United States, 399 A.2d 21, 28 (D.C.1979) (citing Brown v. United States, 244 A.2d 487, 490 (D.C.1968)). In fulfilling this requirement, the movant must make a fivefold showing.

Bridgeford v. United States

411 A.2d 633 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Feb 7, 1980

See Barker v. Win-go, supra. 4 . … United States v. Cook, 149 U.S.App. D.C. 197, 462 F.2d 301 (1972); Brown v. United States, 84 U.S.App.D.C. 222 , 171 F.2d 832 (1949).

Young v. DOES

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 3, 2020

Benefits Review Board: Mission Statement, U.S. … Co. v.

Payne v. United States

294 A.2d 501 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 25, 1972

In Edelin v. … See Schraeder v. Sears, 192 Iowa 604 , 185 N.W. 110 (1921), and Isner v. United States, 8 F.2d 487 (4th Cir. 1925). 4 .

Roane v. United States

432 A.2d 1218 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 10, 1981

Rouse v. United States, D.C.App., 402 A.2d 1218, 1220 (1979); accord, Rease v. United States, D.C.App., 403 A.2d 322, 328 (1979) (per curiam); Day v. United States, D.C.App., 390 A.2d 957, 961 (1978); see Super. Ct. Cr. … Compare Petway v.

Johnson v. United States

763 A.2d 707 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 30, 2000

See People v. Brown, 268 A.D.2d 592 , 704 N.Y.S.2d 88 , 2000 N.Y.App. Div. Lexis 907 (N.Y.A.D.2000); State v. Jones, 55 Conn.App. 243 , 739 A.2d 697, 700 (1999); State v. … Brown, supra, 704 N.Y.S.2d at 89 (citations omitted).

Cook v. United States

932 A.2d 506 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 16, 2007

See Walden v. United States, 366 A.2d 1075, 1076-77 (D.C.1976). … Brown v. United States, 795 A.2d 56, 63 (D.C.2002); see also (Timothy) Robinson v.

In re Maule

16 F. Cas. 1165 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 15, 1853

This makes a paint equal to any iron paint, of a strong reddish-brown color, and it is very abundant. And so as to the hematites and other ores of iron. To the fourth, Mr. … The cases of The King v.

Schartow v. Schleicher

35 App. D.C. 347 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 26, 1910

The Board found that Schleicher’s constructive reduction did not occur until September 3d, 1907, his filing date, and awarded priority to Schartow. … C. 77; Burson v. Vogel, 29 App. D. C. 388), we pass immediately to a consideration of the question whether under the evidence Schartow was reasonably ■ diligent thereafter.

Boyd v. Benton

52 A.2d 499 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 17, 1947

Coffin-Redington Co. v. Porter, 9 Cir., 156 F.2d 113 ; Bowles v. Royal Wine & Liquor, Inc., 7 Cir., 155 E.2d 137; Bowles v. Haymond, D.C., Conn., 59 E. Supp. 482; Bowles v. S. S. … Kresge Co., D.C.,W.D.Mo., 59 F.Supp. 427 ; Brown v. Banana Distributors of Connecticut, Inc., D.C., Conn., 52 F.Supp. 864 , Fleetham v. Winter Hill Liquor Store, Inc., 319 Mass. 29 , 64 N.E.2d 650 .

Rayburn L. Levy v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services and Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

84 A.3d 518 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Feb 6, 2014

LEVY, PETITIONER, v. … Finally, we note the potential relevance of this court’s decision in Fluellyn v.

Williams v. Williams

495 A.2d 754 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 24, 1985

Since the parties impliedly consented to try the issue of divorce, see Moore v. … Riggs National Bank of Washington, 338 A.2d 445, 450 (D.C.1975) and Cooper v.

Societe De Condensation Et D'Applications Mecaniques v. Coe

2 D.C. 171 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 1, 1935

If the copies of the record are not filed within the time specified or within any extension thereof granted by the board of appeals, the appeal shall be dismissed.” .The Board of Appeals of the Patent Office has construed … Court, including Wilber v. U. S. ex rel. Kadrie, 281 U. S. 206 . The motion of the petitioner for judgment will be denied.

Moon v. The Family Federation for World Peace

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 25, 2022

African Methodist Episcopal Church v. … M.A.P. v.

Mason v. United States

53 A.3d 1084 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 4, 2012

United States, 26 A.3d 248, 262 (D.C.2011) (alteration in original) (quoting Brown v. … Brown v. United States, 627 A.2d 499, 508 (D.C.1993); accord, Brown v. United States, 864 A.2d 996, 1002 (D.C. 2005).

United States v. Burrell

286 A.2d 845 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 31, 1972

In United States v. … See Allen v. United States, 129 U.S.App.D.C. 61, 64 , 390 F.2d 476, 479 (1968); Bailey v. United States, 128 U.S.App.D.C. 354 , 364 n.9, 389 F.2d 305 , 315 n.9 (1967) (concurring opinion of Leventhal, J.); Brown v.

Austin v. United States

433 A.2d 1081 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 20, 1981

In Jones v. … Subsequently, in Brown v.