Case law

Jackson v. Young

546 A.2d 1009 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 2, 1988

Johnson v. Young, 372 A.2d 992, 994 (D.C.1977). … United States, 412 A.2d 21, 25 (D.C.1980) (quoting United States v. Brown, 160 U.S.App.D.C. 190, 194 , 490 F.2d 758, 762 (1973)); see Nick Bombard, Inc. v.

Robinson v. United States

513 A.2d 218 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 30, 1986

Brown v. … Brown, 387 A.2d at 730 ; Bussey, 139 U.S.App.D.C. at 272, 432 F.2d at 1334 ; see United States v. Williamson, 482 F.2d 508, 514 (5th Cir.1973).

Fitzgerald v. United States

443 A.2d 1295 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 19, 1982

MACK, Associate Judge, dissenting: I see no justification for requiring corroboration in sex offenses based upon distinctions between a “mature” female complainant (see Arnold v. … In this en banc posture again, and having taken the route we took in Arnold , I agree with Chief Judge Newman, that with appropriate safeguards, we should abolish the requirement across the board. I respectfully dissent.

Davis v. Potomac Electric Power Co.

449 A.2d 278 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 26, 1982

In Brown v. … In United Air Lines, Inc. v.

Jones v. United States

566 A.2d 44 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 13, 1989

Viewing the totality of the circumstances, Brown v. … District of Columbia v. M.M., 407 A.2d 698 (D.C.1979); Irby v. United States, 342 A.2d 33 (D.C.1975).

Barnhardt v. District of Columbia

8 A.3d 1206 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 18, 2010

In Brown v. … Haupt v.

Jones v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services

519 A.2d 704 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 14, 1987

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corp., 318 U.S. 80, 87-88 , 63 S.Ct. 454 -459, 87 L.Ed. 626 (1943); Club 99, Inc. v. District of Columbia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, 457 A.2d 773, 775 (D.C.1982). … See Rhema Christian Center v. District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustment, 515 A.2d 189, 198 (D.C.1986). We understand the Director’s public policy arguments as intended to bolster his conclusion that Mr.

Hill v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DOES

717 A.2d 909 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 17, 1998

See Dietrich v. District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustment, 320 A.2d 282, 287 (D.C.1974). Therefore, in the absence of exceptional circumstances, we will not entertain a claim that was not raised before the agency. … Glenbrook Road Ass'n v. District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustment, 605 A.2d 22, 33 (D.C.1992).

Whittley v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services

478 A.2d 1072 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 12, 1984

D.C.Code § 46-lll(a) (1981); see Hockaday v. D. C. Department of Employment Services, 443 A.2d 8 (1982). … Steinberg v. Board of Review, 34 Pa.Cmwlth. 294 , 383 A.2d 1284 (1978).

Appeal of A.H.

590 A.2d 123 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 23, 1991

We do note, however, that appellants' reliance on Stevens v. Brown, 194 A.2d 126 (D.C.1963) is misplaced. … Williams v. Board of Trustees of Mount Jezreel Baptist Church, 589 *130 A.2d 901, 907 (D.C.1991).

District of Columbia v. Stokes

785 A.2d 666 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 21, 2001

The District asked the “full Board” of the OEA to review the ALJ’s decision. … Martin v. District of Columbia Courts, 753 A.2d 987, 991 (D.C.2000) (footnote omitted).

Mitchell v. United States

368 A.2d 514 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 19, 1977

Whiteley v. Warden, 401 U.S. S60, 566, 91 S.Ct. 1031 , 28 L.Ed.2d 306 (1971); Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410 , 417 n. 5, 89 S.Ct. 584 , 21 L.Ed.2d 637 (1969); United States v. … In Galloway v.

Wilson v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

912 A.2d 1186 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 21, 2006

Wilson testified at trial that on Saturday, October 14, 2004, she boarded the U8 WMATA bus with her niece. She described the condition of the bus when she boarded as “filthy ... dirty [and] nasty.” Ms. … Lynn v.

Kozlovska v. United States

30 A.3d 799 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 3, 2011

See Brown v. United States, 840 A.2d 82, 88 (D.C.2004) (citing Pickett v. United States, 822 A.2d 404, 405 (D.C.2003); Malloy v. United States, 797 A.2d 687, 690 (D.C.2002)). … See Blackson v. United States, 979 A.2d 1, 6 (D.C.2009) (citing Dyson v. United States, 848 A.2d 603, 611 (D.C.2004)).

Junior v. United States

634 A.2d 411 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 29, 1993

See New York v. Harris, supra, 495 U.S. at 18-19, 110 S.Ct. at 1643 -44 (citing Brown v. Illinois, 422 U.S. 590 , 95 S.Ct. 2254 , 45 L.Ed.2d 416 (1975); Dunaway v. … He also had a blue and rust striped sweater, blue jeans and brown boots.”

Minnick v. United States

607 A.2d 519 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 5, 1992

Texas v. … United States v. Brown, 150 U.S.App.D.C. 113, 114 , 463 F.2d 949, 950 (1972) (citations omitted; emphasis in original), cited with approval in McWilliams v. United States, 298 A.2d 38, 39 (D.C.App.1972); see Rawlings v.

Brock v. United States

404 A.2d 955 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 30, 1979

Relying on Jacobs v. … v.

Buitrago v. D.C. Dep't of Employment Services

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 15, 2024

Schs. v. D.C. Dep’t of Emp. … See Adams v. Hinchman, 154 F.3d 420, 424 n.7 (D.C.

Koehne v. Price

68 A.2d 806 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 13, 1949

Brown, 170 Ark. 949 , 281 S.W. 904 . . Hade v. Brotherton, 11 Fed.Cas.No. 5,892, 3 Cranch C.C. 594 , supra; Campbell v. Wallace, 46 Mich. 320 , 9 N.W. 432 ; Willoughby v. … One 1937 Buick Coupe, Cal.App., 201 P.2d 402 ; Meyers v. Brown-Forman Distillery Co., 289 Ky. 185 , 158 S.W.2d 407 ; Southland Life Ins. Co. v.

RICHARD Z. DUFFEE v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

93 A.3d 1273 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 3, 2014

Bliss v. Bliss, 733 A.2d 954, 960 n.13 (D.C. 1999); Ramos v. … Brown v. General Servs. Admin., 425 U.S. 820, 828 (1961) (“Whether that understanding of Congress was in some ultimate sense incorrect is not what is important in determining the legislative intent . . . .