Case law

Moore v. United States

428 A.2d 364 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 5, 1981

Moore v. United States, D.C.App., 387 A.2d 714 (1978). … Brown v. United States, D.C.App., 244 A.2d 487 (1968). This record demonstrates no abuse of discretion in denying a continuance. Appellant proffered no testimony relevant to the issue before the court.

Communications Workers v. District of Columbia Commission on Human Rights

367 A.2d 149 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 22, 1976

See Batiste v. Furnco Construction Corp., 503 F.2d 447 (7th Cir. 1974); Cooper v. Philip Morris, Inc., 464 F.2d 9 (6th Cir. 1972); Voutsis v. Union Carbide Corp., 452 F.2d 889, 893-94 (2d Cir. 1971). … The findings must support the end result in a discernible manner [Dietrich v. District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustment, 293 A.2d 470, 473 (D.C.App.1972); citations omitted.]

Christopher v. Bethune

749 A.2d 130 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 30, 2000

R. 56; Colbert v. Georgetown Univ., 641 A.2d 469, 472 (D.C.1994) (en banc), we are satisfied that the judgment must be reversed on other grounds. … *132 Brown, 623 A.2d 1270, 1272 (Me.1993) (attorney’s admission of error admissible in evidence when not made during compromise negotiations); 4 Ronald E.

Watts v. United States

297 A.2d 790 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 7, 1972

Terry v. Ohio, supra. The furtive movements standing alone do not warrant such a search. United States v. Humphrey, supra; People v. Superior Court of Yolo County, supra; People v. Pitts, 40 Mich. App. … Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 484 , 83 S.Ct. 407 , 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963); Brown v. State, 481 S.W.2d 106 (Tex.Cr.App. 1972).

Brooks v. United States

683 A.2d 1369 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 30, 1995

Appellant’s claim that the trial court erred in conducting an in camera review contradicts the position appellant took in his post-trial motion for discovery. 6 See Brown v. … See Larrison v. United States, 24 F.2d 82, 87-88 (7th Cir.1928). See also United States v.

Morrissette v. Boiseau

91 A.2d 130 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 8, 1952

Thompson v. Park Sav. Bank, 68 App.D.C. 272 , 96 F.2d 544 ; Brown v. Gesellschaft Pur Drahtlose Tel. M. B. H., 70 App.D.C. 94 , 104 F.2d 227 ; Fraser v. Crounse, D.C.Mun.App., 56 A.2d 54 . See also Price v. … Van Dines, Inc. v. Goetze, D.C.Mun.App., 66 A.2d 693 . 3 .Chesapeake & Potomac Tel. Co. v. Clay, U.S.App.D.C., 194 F.2d 888, 890 . 4 .

Olevsky v. District of Columbia

548 A.2d 78 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 16, 1988

Basically, Warren claimed, with the support of an investigator for the Wage and Hour Board (the Board) for some of his contentions, that he had not been paid all of the wages to which he was entitled, and that he had been … dismissed in reprisal for making a complaint to the Board.

Savage v. District of Columbia

52 A.2d 120 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 18, 1947

Brush v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 300 U.S. 352 , 57 S.Ct. 495 , 81 L.Ed. 691 , 108 A.L.R. 1428 ; Trescott v. City of Waterloo, C.C., N.D.Iowa, E.D., 26 F. 592 ; Hathaway v. … Grumbine v. Mayor, Board of Aldermen, etc., 2 MacArthur 578 , 29 Am.Rep. 626 ; Clark v. Atlantic City, C.C., D.N.J., 180 P. 598 . Buttrick v. City of Lowell, 1 Allen, Mass., 172, 79 Am.Dec. 721. Davis v.

Joiner v. United States

585 A.2d 176 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 22, 1991

Entsminger threw the board at Lopez’ feet and began to run as Diaz and Lopez chased him. … In Ladner v.

Curtis v. United States

349 A.2d 469 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 18, 1975

See Kenion v. United States, D.C.App., 302 A.2d 723 (1973); Gray v. United States, D.C.App., 292 A.2d 153 (1972). … Although Terry v.

Matter of LM

432 A.2d 692 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 4, 1981

In District of Columbia v. … United States, 327 F.2d 639 (9th Cir. 1964); Rogers v. United States, 326 F.2d 56 (10th Cir. 1963); Carter v. United States, 113 U.S.App. D.C. 123, 306 F.2d 283 (1962); Cunningham v.

United States v. Shorter

343 A.2d 569 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 29, 1975

United States v. … United States v. Brown, 155 U.S.App.D.C. 402, 406 , 478 F.2d 606, 610 (1973); Cameron v. Mullen, 128 U.S.App.D.C. 235 , 240 n. 12, 387 F.2d 193 , 198 n. 12 (1967). 3 . Cf. McDonald v. United States, 114 U.S.

Gordan v. William J. Davis, Inc.

270 A.2d 138 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 21, 1970

. *140 What appellant seeks is to be free to attack the validity of the lease under our decision in Brown v. … In Javins v.

Senator Cab Co. v. Rothberg

42 A.2d 245 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 16, 1945

“The fact that a contrary inference is possible from the evidence does not allow us to set aside the one drawn by the Board.” Virginia Electric & Power Co. v. … National Labor Relations Board, 319 U.S. 533, 542, 543 , 63 S.Ct. 1214, 1220 , 87 L.Ed. 1568 .

Cheryl Rivera v. Jack Lew

99 A.3d 269 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 11, 2014

P’ship v. District of Columbia, 764 A.2d 798, 812-13 (D.C. 2001). … Officers v. Vaughn, 553 A.2d 1222, 1231 (D.C. 1989) (Schwelb, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part)).

Wood v. BARWOOD CAB COMPANY

648 A.2d 670 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 11, 1994

Thus this case is governed not by Rhone but by Harlem Taxicab Ass’n v. … See Karr v. C. Dudley Brown & Associates, Inc., 567 A.2d 1306, 1310-1311 (D.C.1989).

Schiller v. Schiller

194 A.2d 665 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 4, 1963

As Justice Cardozo stated in Finlay v. … Brown, D.C.App., 194 A. 2d 126 . [8] But not for the reason stated, i. e., that both parents are fit and proper custodians and equally entitled to custody.

Phillip O. Battle v. DOES / WMATA

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 4, 2018

Hosp. v. District of Columbia Dep’t of Emp’t Servs., 916 A.2d 149, 151 (D.C. 2007) (quoting Mills v. District of Columbia Dep’t of Emp’t Servs., 838 A.2d 325, 328 (D.C. 2003), and Dietrich v. … See Olson v.

In Re Page

956 A.2d 683 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 11, 2008

On further consideration of the certified copy of the order from the Court of Appeals of Maryland suspending respondent by consent, see Attorney Grievance Comm’n of Md. v. … Page, 402 Md. 688 , 939 A.2d 116 (2008), this court’s February 13, 2008, order that suspended respondent from the practice of law pending further action of the court, the July 17, 2008, Report and Recommendation of the Board

Washington & Georgetown Railroad v. Patterson

9 App. D.C. 423 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 20, 1896

In the case of Hodsoll v. … Co. v. Putnam, 118 U. S. 545, 554 , and cases there cited.