Case law

Synanon Foundation, Inc. v. Bernstein

503 A.2d 1254 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 29, 1986

Kabler once again did not qualify this statement. Bernstein instructed his attorney to draw up an Agreement of Sale, which the parties executed on April 28. … The trial court in its pretrial order, mentions that Synanon has qualified as a nonprofit organization under the law of the District of Columbia.

Crutchfield v. Hewett

2 App. D.C. 373 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Feb 6, 1894

The burden of proof is upon the complainants to establish the necessary allegations of the bill which are denied, and this includes proof that Mrs. Shepherd did not execute the deed of trust. … Kelly received it, qualified and entered upon the duties of the office. No one questioned his authority.

Citizens Ass'n of Georgetown v. District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustment

403 A.2d 737 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 21, 1979

The 1977-1982 phase of the plan contained a proposal for the establishment of campus boundaries. … The BZA’s conclusion regarding the campus boundary issue reads as follows: On the matter of the campus boundaries, the record clearly reflects that the property which the University is requesting to be included in its boundary

Auger v. District of Columbia

756 A.2d 930 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 3, 2000

The District argues that this is especially true where as here the petitioner has the burden of establishing that his administrative remedies have been exhausted before filing suit in Superior Court. … Thus, the clause “provided that” qualifies and ultimately restricts the circumstances under which the Board may dismiss a petition.

Stewart v. Elliott

13 D.C. 307 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 13, 1883

Its whole knowledge of the case being *317 thus derived, it is but illy qualified to pass an enlightened judgment upon it. … It clearly appears he did not read the will, and it must therefore have been read to him, or he could not have comprehended or understood it.

Nicola v. Washington Times Corp.

947 A.2d 1164 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 15, 2008

Nicola insisted that Quinn was not qualified to serve as his assistant, and the position was filled by someone else. … To establish a prima facie case of discrimination in a case based on membership in a protected class, a plaintiff must show that: (1) he is "a member of a protected class”; (2) he "was qualified for the job from which he

Auto World, Inc. v. District of Columbia

627 A.2d 11 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 28, 1993

A special relationship, as an exception to the public duty doctrine, may be established by showing that a statute prescribes “mandatory acts clearly for the protection of a particular class of persons rather than the public … applies to law enforcement services"), the court stated, with regard to a vehicle registration statute, that: [although D.C.Code § 40-102(c) (1990 Repl.) requires the District to issue a certificate and identification tag to qualified

District of Columbia v. Remi Bamidele

103 A.3d 516 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 13, 2014

It is true that, because the statute abrogates the District’s common-law tort immunity, we interpret it strictly. Pitts, supra, 391 A.2d at 807 . … Moreover, both reports clearly indicate that Ms. Bamidele was present during the assault and witnessed the officers beating her husband.

Robinson v. Howard University

455 A.2d 1363 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 26, 1983

The award of costs is clearly a lesser sanction than the dismissal with prejudice which Super.Ct.Civ.R. 41(b) permits and which we affirmed on comparable facts in Taylor v. Washington Hospital Center, supra. … The court in Marks concluded that references in other cases to the “immunity” of in forma pauperis parties were intended only to indicate the “inability of a court or prevailing party to enforce a judgment against one who

Munson v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services

721 A.2d 623 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 24, 1998

The Mitchell decision did not clearly specify what standard applies; that is, whether both tests must be satisfied or whether the use of either test alone is acceptable. … If the Director was intending to establish a definitive agency position that the “relative nature of the work” test was the only test to apply to determine the existence of an employment relationship under the WCA, we would

CRAIG L. RUSSELL v. CALL/D, LLC

122 A.3d 860 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 15, 2015

The deposition testimony also establishes that in November 2010, a pipe burst in Apartment 1, causing flooding in the apartment. … Zimmet was ―not qualified to testify as to the source of [Russell‘s] disease,‖ among them that Dr.

Truesdale v. United States

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 5, 2026

Another witness, Aaron Cook—a mutual friend of Hilton and Godsey who had arranged the sale—likewise implicated Truesdale after the government gave Cook immunity. … He ultimately changed his story and received immunity in exchange for testifying against Truesdale. Two other civilian witnesses testified to events in the immediate wake of the shooting.

Kay v. Pick

711 A.2d 1251 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 21, 1998

At a minimum, appellant might have inquired further of the California defendant in an effort to establish the need and scope, ab initio, of the subpoena that he served upon Andary. … The trial judge’s conclusion that appellant made a minimal showing of need was clearly not an abuse of her discretion.

District of Columbia v. ExxonMobil Oil Corp.

172 A.3d 412 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 2, 2017

The Supreme Court established in Warth v. … District of Columbia, 8 A.3d 1206, 1214 (D.C. 2010) (referring to the District of Columbia’s “sovereign immunity”).

Vizion One, Inc. v. District of Columbia Department of Health Care Finance

170 A.3d 781 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 5, 2017

One allegedly had coached Medicaid beneficiaries how to falsely qualify for personal care services that Medicaid reimbursed, and both employees allegedly had paid Medicaid beneficiaries to sign timesheets, or to allow their … In re Na.H., supra, 65 A.3d at 116, clearly stated that statutory deadlines are jurisdictional limitations, but not claim-processing rules.

Drejza v. Vaccaro

650 A.2d 1308 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 25, 1994

In such circumstances, police officers must gather sufficient credible evidence to establish probable cause to believe that the friend or acquaintance has committed an unlawful sexual assault on the complainant; they need … Vaccaro unsuccessfully invoked absolute immunity and qualified immunity. . Contrary to the judge's impression, specific intent is not required; reckless infliction of emotional distress is sufficient. See Part III.

Niosi v. Aiello

69 A.2d 57 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 21, 1949

Indeed, any fact * * * admitted by counsel, may be the ground of the court’s procedure, equally as if established by the clearest proof; and if, in the progress of a trial, either by such admission or proof, a fact is developed … He should be allowed to explain and qualify it, so far as the truth will permit; but if, with such explanation and qualification, it should clearly appear that there could be no recovery, the court should not hesitate to

MICHAEL WONSON v. UNITED STATES

136 A.3d 60 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 14, 2016

Wonson‟s case had been transported from the property division to the courthouse, later qualifying, “[a]s far as my knowledge it was.” … Turning to the particular facts of this case, the government clearly failed to establish by a reasonable probability that it had maintained an unbroken chain of custody over the proffered ballistics material.

O'Malley v. Chevy Chase Bank, F.S.B.

766 A.2d 964 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Feb 8, 2001

In order to qualify as a bidder, each potential bidder was required to have in his or her possession a minimum of $10,000 in the form of cash, certified check or cashier’s check. … As noted supra, by establishing minimum requirements, the statute preempts the lender's attempt to restrict the right to cure default. 10 .

Meaders v. United States

519 A.2d 1248 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 30, 1986

Further testimony established that Vaccaro had not prepared the form. … “A qualified witness must be one with knowledge of the declarant’s business,” El-izarraras v.