Case law

Trilon Plaza Co. v. Allstate Leasing Corp.

399 A.2d 34 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Feb 21, 1979

Catlin v. … See Panos v. Nefflen, D.C.App., 205 A.2d 600, 602 (1964), quoting Shima v. Brown, 78 U.S.App.D.C. 268, 268 , 140 F.2d 337, 337 (1943). We find no abuse of discretion. See generally Johnson v.

Allworth v. Howard University

890 A.2d 194 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 12, 2006

As we reiterated in Brown v. … See Brown, supra, 802 A.2d at 385 (citing Loebl v. New York Univ., 255 A.D.2d 257 , 680 N.Y.S.2d 495, 496-97 (1998)); Kakaes v.

Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Gibson Ex Rel. Gibson

118 A.2d 386 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 17, 1955

Lalekos v. Manset, D.C.Mun.App., 47 A.2d 617 ; Washington Realty Co. v. Harding, D.C.Mun.App., 45 A.2d 785 ; Baltimore & O. R. Co. v. Postom, supra. 7 . Woodward v. Ragland, 5 App.D.C. 220 ; McChristian v. … Popkin, 75 Cal.App.2d 249 , 171 P.2d 85 ; Sandoval v. Southern California Enterprises, 98 Cal.App.2d 240 , 219 P.2d 928 . 8 . Brown v. Haas, D.C.Mun.App., 72 A.2d 39 ; Nickel v.

Meckler v. Baugh

53 A.2d 695 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 12, 1947

Hundley v. Gorewitz, supra [ 132 F.2d 24 ]. It should also be remembered that the covenant, by its own terms, now has less than three years to run. Compare Jameson v. Brown, 71 App. D.C. 254 , 109 F.2d 830 . … See also Osius v. Barton and Stephl v. Moore, supra. Mitchell v. Ralph D. Cohn, Inc., D.C.Mun.App., 52 A.2d 631 ; Sabghir v. Ginsburg, D.C.Mun.App., 51 A.2d 308 .

Williams v. United States

237 A.2d 539 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 19, 1968

. 179 , 26 F.2d 551 (1928). 4 *541 It is alleged that the Government has the burden of showing as an element of its proof that appellant does not come within the statutory exception to D.C.Code 1967, § 22-3204. 5 But in Brown … v.

Atkinson v. United States

295 A.2d 899 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 13, 1972

Brown v. United States, 125 U.S.App.D.C. 43 , 365 F.2d 976 (1966). Some argument is made as to the exact time the arrest occurred. … V, 1972). 5 . Id. § 11-1903 (Supp. V, 1972). 6 . 18 U.S.C. § 4209 (1970). 7 . 18 U.S.C. §§ 5005-5026 (1970).

Owens v. Wilkinson

20 App. D.C. 51 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 6, 1902

McCann, 6 Dana, 366 ; Clippinger v. Hepbaugh, 5 Watts & Serg. 315 ; Spalding v. Ewing, 149 Pa. St. 375; Powers v. Skinner, 34 Vt. 274 ; Harris v. Roof, 10 Barb. 489 ; Rose v. Truax, 21 Barb. 361 ; Brown v. … Brown, 34 Barb. 533 ; Gil v. Williams, 12 La. Ann. 219 ; Coquillard v. Bears, 21 Ind. 479 ; RR. Co. v. Chicago R’Way, 75 Wis. 224 ; Houlton v. Dunn, 60 Minn. 26 ; Richardson v. Scott’s Bluff Co., 81 N. W. Rep. 309 .

Dobbs v. Neverson

393 A.2d 147 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 10, 1978

Subsequently, in Johnson v. … In Matthews v.

King v. District of Columbia Water & Sewer Authority

803 A.2d 966 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 25, 2002

In reversing the Board’s denial, we stated that “the District had [offered] a most compelling reason” for a continuance. 679 A.2d at 1043 . … Croce v.

Jordan v. United States

414 A.2d 873 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 5, 1980

Reavis v. United States,, D.C.App., 395 A.2d 75 , 79 n.3 (1978). See Harling v. United States, D.C.App., 372 A.2d 1011, 1013 (1977); Shelton v. United States, D.C.App., 323 A.2d 717, 718 (1974). . … United States v. Weaver, 148 U.S.App.D.C. 3, 4 , 458 F.2d 825, 826 (1972); United States v. Holland, 144 U.S.App.D.C. 225, 227 , 445 F.2d 701, 703 (1971). See generally United States v.

In re Brownlow

252 A.2d 903 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 7, 1969

Brown-low, you are under the influence of alcohol in my Court, at this moment. “Mr. Brownlow: Do you think so, Your Honor ? “The Court: Indeed I do. “Mr. Brownlow: I don’t. “The Court: You don’t? “Mr. … Fisher v. Pace, 336 U.S. 155, 161 , 69 S.Ct. 425 , 93 L.Ed. 569 (1949).

Dyer v. William S. Bergman & Associates, Inc.

657 A.2d 1132 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 20, 1995

On September 7, 1989, Dyer met with NSSTA’s board of directors. John Macker, the former president of NSSTA, testified that Dyer told the board of his offer to buy out the NSSTA account. … Urban Invs., Inc. v.

Young v. United States

284 A.2d 671 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 20, 1971

Appellant cites Townsley v. … See Brown v. United States, D.C.App., 261 A.2d 834, 835 (1970).

E. P. Hinkel & Co. v. Washington Carpet Corp.

212 A.2d 328 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 21, 1965

Yardley v. Clothier, 51 F. 506, 507 (3rd Cir. 1892); Moreland v. Dickerson & Baker Lumber Co., 12 Ala.App. 576 , 68 So. 526, 527 (1915). … Cited with approval in Wesley v. Walter A. Brown, D.C.App., 196 A.2d 921 (1964)..

In re Gardner

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Feb 3, 2022

Gardner’s argument that courts should be subject to deadlines enforced with financial penalties.  17 Superior Court Board of Judges assisted by its Rules Committee, see Moghalu v … As we explained in Vining v.

Greenbaum v. Smith

409 A.2d 621 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 10, 1979

See Scott v. … Arden v. Brown, 4 D.C. 121 (Cir. Ct. D.C. 1803).” We do not reach this issue because we find no evidence that Kahn purported to assign rights under the October 4 contract, either orally or in writing.

Funchess v. United States

677 A.2d 1019 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 30, 1996

Brown v. United States, 590 A.2d 1008, 1020 (D.C.1991). … To paraphrase Justice Stewart, writing for the Court in Ybarra v.

United States v. Hunter

692 A.2d 1370 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 24, 1997

In Greenwood v. … Brown v. United States, 349 A.2d 467, 468 (D.C.1975); see also Reavis v. United States, 395 A.2d 75, 78 (D.C.1978) (quoting Brown).

Vernell v. Gould

495 A.2d 306 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 10, 1985

Pollock v. Brown, 395 A.2d 50, 52 (D.C.1978) (citations omitted). … Pollock v. Brown, supra, 395 A.2d at 53 . Third, the trial court’s finding that Mrs. Vernell was feigning a hearing problem is unsupported by the record. Uneontrovert-ed medical evidence established that Mrs.

Tsintolas Realty Co. v. Mendez

984 A.2d 181 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 25, 2009

Goozh v. Capitol Souvenir Co., 462 A.2d 1140, 1142 (D.C.1983) (quoting Brown v. Brown, 343 A.2d 59, 61 (D.C.1975)). Accordingly, we enforce a valid and binding settlement agreement just like “any other contract.” … Hart v. Vermont Inves. Ltd.