Case law

Sheridan-Kalorama, Etc. v. Dc Bd., Etc.

411 A.2d 959 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 7, 1979

It is an established maxim of review that an agency's interpretation of its administrative regulations is to be given great deference and to be upheld unless clearly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulations. [5] See … In support of this position, intervenors cite several sections of the regulations which supposedly "clearly establish" this interpretation.

Perkins v. District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustment

813 A.2d 206 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 31, 2002

The Board believes that this interpretation is not logical, that the words “steel products” clearly apply to each of [the] activities fisted, not just warehousing. (Emphasis added.) II. … The Rule of Last Antecedent states that "ordinarily, qualifying phrases are to be applied to the words or phrase immediately preceding them, and not to others more remote.” District of Columbia v.

Dobson v. United States

426 A.2d 361 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 30, 1981

When these factors, taken together, fail to establish a basis for a plea of insanity, the court properly may deny the motion. … Nevertheless, by remanding that case we did not mean to establish a standard whereby only an accused exhibiting the most extreme abnormal behavior would qualify for the appointment of a private psychiatrist.

Pettus v. United States

37 A.3d 213 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Feb 9, 2012

Even as thus qualified, however, we reject appellant’s argument that the NRC Report represents a scientific consensus as to handwriting identification materially different from that established at the evidentiary hearing. … However, this framework is not specific enough to qualify as a validated method for this type of analysis.

Maurice F. Naccache v. Angela M. Taylor

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 27, 2018

And if a party elected not to establish a supplemental needs trust, he or she would in all likelihood no longer qualify for Medicaid benefits in any case. … By its wording, the District lien clearly covers payments actually made.

In re A.T.A.

910 A.2d 293 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 9, 2006

Moreover, L.C.L. stated that she would terminate any contact the twins had with A.T.A. unless a qualified therapist determined that such contact would be in the children’s best interest. … custodian for the child must be given weighty consideration which can be overcome only by a showing, by clear and convincing evidence, that the custodial arrangement and preservation of the parent-child relationship is clearly

Phillips v. District of Columbia

714 A.2d 768 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 2, 1998

On the contrary, the expert must clearly articulate and [refer to] a standard of care by which the defendant’s actions can be measured.... … In the present case, a well-qualified expert used the word “national” in describing the standard of care.

Williams v. Williams

436 A.2d 1291 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 29, 1981

Appellee submitted the names of three independent and qualified appraisers to appellant for her approval. She rejected all three suggestions made by her former husband, and countered by offering the name Joe R. … The parties have made the appraisers the judges—the court of last resort—unless they have mistaken their authority, departed from the submission, clearly misconceived their duties, acted upon some fundamental and apparent

Elhalaby v. United States

999 A.2d 912 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 5, 2010

In other words, violations of a defendant's right to allocute are not immune from the stringent plain error standard of review. … Elhalaby urges us to interpret R. 43(c)(4) and Applewhite as establishing the limits of a *916 defendant’s right to allocute at a probation revocation hearing, rather than establishing the lack of such a right.

United States v. Hammond

681 A.2d 1140 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 15, 1996

Although Hammond apparently agrees with our reading of Williamson , he disputes the government’s contention that the trial judge interpreted Williamson as establishing a per se rule. … alternative contention that the trial judge’s evidentia-ry rulings should be affirmed because the government "cannot claim the unavailability of a government witness that is predicated on the government’s own refusal to immunize

Duncan v. United States

629 A.2d 1 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 29, 1993

Prouse, supra, 440 U.S. at 658 , 99 S.Ct. at 1398 (“the States have a vital interest in ensuring that only those qualified to do so are permitted to operate motor vehicles [and] that these vehicles are fit for safe operation … Accordingly, the evidence was sufficient to support a finding that the roadblock was set up pursuant to established guidelines.

Waterside Towers Resident Ass'n v. Trilon Plaza Co.

2 A.3d 1084 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 26, 2010

We have held that a property transaction must involve “an ‘absolute transfer’ or amount to the passing of ‘general and absolute title,’ ” in order to qualify as a sale under subsection (a). 9 We have established that the … the statute itself, and that, absent a clearly expressed legislative intention to the contrary, that language must ordinarily be regarded as conclusive ....

Eric D. Foreman v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 30, 2015

The trial court held him in civil contempt,8 and the government granted him limited immunity relating to his trial testimony. Mr. … Godleski is ―clearly erroneous.‖ Nor can we say that the trial court was wrong in its interpretation of the requirements of D.C. Code § 14-102 (b)(3).

Stevenson v. District of Columbia

562 A.2d 622 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 14, 1989

On appeal, he contends that he had a constitutional right to a jury trial even though the statutory penalty for the offense is insufficient to qualify for a jury trial under D.C.Code § 16-705 (1981). … Rather, it can be established by an accumulation of evidence, e.g., slurred speech, odor of alcohol on the breath, and similar circumstances. Washington, supra, 538 A.2d at 1151 .

FAMILY FEDERATION FOR WORLD PEACE AND UNIFICATION INTERNATIONAL v. HYUN JIN MOON

129 A.3d 234 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 24, 2015

Any claim for early immunity from suit is far less compelling than may be the case in more typical disputes evoking First Amendment considerations. … established that [the legal theories at issue] were firmly established as distinct and separate from matters of church doctrine or polity.”

Austin v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 25, 2025

Austin’s vocal “demeanor” in particular, ante at 2, 19, so clearly established that her statements to the 911 operator were excited utterances, it could have granted the government’s … Austin’s testimony clearly did not support the admission of her call under this hearsay exception.

Tavakoli-Nouri v. Gunther

745 A.2d 939 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Feb 10, 2000

Abandonment involves the “termination of the professional relationship between the physician and patient at an unreasonable time or without affording the patient the opportunity to procure an equally qualified replacement … However, we find no merit in this argument because the record clearly shows that the trial court, in reaching its decision, considered counsel’s representations on December 19, 1999, Tava-koli-Nouri’s past failure to adhere

O'Connell v. Riggs National Bank of Washington, D.C.

475 A.2d 405 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 8, 1984

At the time of testator's death, there was no person then in existence who qualified as “issue” of his daughters. 2 . … It is also he pful to refer to the established meaning of the term “issue” at the time of the will’s execution in 1926.

Jackson v. United States

924 A.2d 1016 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 17, 2007

Rather than establishing past facts that underlie a criminal charge for purposes of future prosecution, the warrant indicates only what appellant has been charged with. … Since no colloquy at all was mandated, the trial court clearly did not commit plain error by omitting the warning that appellant now contends was required.

Vestry of Grace Parish v. District of Columbia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board

366 A.2d 1110 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 1, 1976

This regulation clearly means that the Board cannot issue a liquor license for an establishment whose nearest street main entrance is within four hundred feet of the nearest street main entrance of a church having one hundred … Accordingly, the Board made findings of fact upon the evidence and concluded that: The premises qualify as appropriate for the issuance of a Retailer’s License Class “C” — Restaurant—under Section 14(a) 6 of the Act (25-115