Case law

Boy Scouts of America v. District of Columbia Commission on Human Rights

809 A.2d 1192 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 7, 2002

of Dirs. of Rotary Int’l v. … See United States v. Owens, 788 A.2d 570 , 574 n. 3 (D.C. 2002); Childs v. United States, 760 A.2d 614, 617 (D.C.2000).

Thomas v. United States

824 A.2d 26 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 22, 2003

Velasquez v. United States, 801 A.2d 72, 79 (D.C.2002) (citation omitted). "The extent of cross-examination with respect to a witness' motive to lie is confided to the trial judge's sound discretion." Brown v. … Brown v. United States, 740 A.2d 533, 537 (D.C. 1999). Thus, I conclude that it was error to exclude the cross-examination into Johnson's concern about the child neglect proceedings. 2.

Kids Holdings, Inc. v. Hinojosa

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 21, 2024

See, e.g., Brown v. … See, e.g., Long v.

Banks v. Hoffman (Amended Opinion)

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 29, 2026

See Bergman v. … See Navellier v. Sletten, 52 P.3d 703, 714 (Cal. 2002) (Brown, J., dissenting) (“The cure has become the disease—SLAPP motions are now just the latest form of abusive litigation.”).

McConnaughey v. United States

804 A.2d 334 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 8, 2002

See, e.g., Johnson, 701 A.2d at 1092 ; Ali v. … See Quarles v.

In Re C.S.

804 A.2d 307 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 1, 2002

Petties v. District of Columbia, 894 F.Supp. 465, 466 (D.D.C.Cir.1995); see 20 U.S.C. § 1412 (a) (1997). … In re L.J., 546 A.2d 429 , 437 (D.C. 1988); see Rice v. District of Columbia, 128 U.S.App.

Dunhill v. Director, District of Columbia Department of Transportation

416 A.2d 244 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 11, 1980

See Dupont Circle Citizens Ass’n v. … of regulation under which it is sought); see generally Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v.

In Re Amalgamated Development Co., Inc.

375 A.2d 494 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 20, 1977

A State may not enforce licensing requirements which, though val *497 id in the absence of federal regulation, give “the State’s licensing board a virtual power of review over the federal determination” that a person or agency … V 1975); advising of what action to take after rejection, including after final rejection; and preparing and filing amendments. Sperry v.

Copeland v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services

3 A.3d 331 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 2, 2010

GLICKMAN, Associate Judge: This is an appeal of a Compensation Review Board (“CRB”) order denying an award of attorney’s fees in a public sector disability compensation case. … See, e.g., Steadman v. United Parcel Serv., CRB No. 05-262, 2005 DC Wrk. Comp. LEXIS 381 (Dec. 14, 2005). 5 . Cannon v. Univ. of Chicago, 441 U.S. 677, 696-98 , 99 S.Ct. 1946 , 60 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979). 6 . Missouri v.

Derzavis v. Bepko

766 A.2d 514 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 29, 2000

This case differs from this court’s decision in Lasley v. … (citing District of Columbia v. White, 442 A.2d 159 , 163 n. 9 (D.C.1982)).

Hasbrouck v. Bernstein Management Corporation

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 4, 2024

Baba v. … See Crosby v. Brown, 289 A.3d 696, 698 (D.C. 2023) (dismissal without prejudice entered after limitations period had run “likely amounted to a dismissal with prejudice”).

District of Columbia Department of Administrative Services v. International Brotherhood of Police Officers, Local 445, Service Employees International Union

680 A.2d 434 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 24, 1996

Scherer v. … Torres v.

James v. United States

829 A.2d 963 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 14, 2003

In Terry v. … See Brown v. United States, 590 A.2d 1008, 1014 (D.C.1991).

Green v. United States

209 A.3d 738 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 13, 2019

v. … Cox v.

Germany v. United States

984 A.2d 1217 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 3, 2009

See Brown v. United States, 590 A.2d 1008, 1020 (D.C.1991). … Brown, 590 A.2d at 1020 . And, ultimately, whether the trial court erred in denying appellant’s motion to suppress tangible evidence is subject to de novo review. Id. III.

Chase Manhattan Bank v. Burden

489 A.2d 494 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 27, 1985

Commissioner, 292 F.2d 478 (3d Cir.1961), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 967 , 82 S.Ct. 438 , 7 L.Ed.2d 395 (1962) (shareholder becomes a creditor of the corporation when the board of directors, exercising its discretionary power … Penney Co. v.

Boykin v. District of Columbia

484 A.2d 560 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 26, 1984

See Sledd v. … In Jordan v.

In re Wickers

29 App. D.C. 71 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Feb 5, 1907

These interferences are Wickers v. Weinwurm, No. 23,741; Wickers v. McKee, No. 22,404 (No. 388 Patent Appeal Docket) [ante, 25]; and Wickers v. … He fully sustained the Examiner and Board of Examiners-in-Cliief, holding that the separate matters in all the claims brought up on appeal were in *78 volved in the issues in interference before mentioned.

Redmond, Jr. v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 31, 2025

Brown, 399 F.3d 972, 985 (9th Cir. 2005) (en banc) (Brecht does not apply), with Gilday v. Callahan, 59 F.3d 257, 268 (1st Cir. 1995) (Brecht applies), Rosencrantz v. … Brown, 513 F.3d 1057, 1076 n.12 (9th Cir. 2008) (explaining that Napue materiality is different from Brady materiality because “the prosecution’s knowing use of perjured testimony will be more likely to affect our confidence

Jackson v. United States

329 A.2d 782 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 19, 1974

V Appellant claims a violation of the rule established in Bruton v. … United States, 135 U.S.App.D.C. 233, 234 , 418 F.2d 449, 450 (1968); Brown v.