Case law

Sowder v. Nolan

125 A.2d 52 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Aug 20, 1956

Appellant’s course to the sanctuary of absolute immunity is charted tenuously. The letters could not of themselves initiate a trial board proceeding. … As an informant, acting out of what he believed to be his social duty, appellant, would be entitled to the defense of qualified privilege. 7 The trial court very adequately instructed the jury on qualified privilege and on

Urban Development Solutions, LLC v. District of Columbia

992 A.2d 1255 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 15, 2010

The trial court dismissed UDS’s lawsuit on the ground that the selection committee enjoyed absolute immunity. UDS appealed; it contends that the District is not shielded by absolute immunity in this case. … However, the RFP clearly reflected concern about the need for a District subsidy, such as the tax abatement contained in UDS’s proposal.

District of Columbia v. OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORPORATION

572 A.2d 394 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Mar 8, 1990

District of Columbia, 132 U.S. 1, 9 , 10 S.Ct. 19, 22 , 33 L.Ed. 231 (1889) (District is “a separate political community,” a municipality, and a *401 state only in a qualified, non-constitutional sense); Firemen’s Ins. … The Lee Court observed that although sovereign immunity had "repeatedly been asserted here, the principle [had] never been discussed or the reasons for it given, but it [had] always been treated as an established doctrine

Blackburn v. United States

171 A.2d 254 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jun 2, 1961

To obtain his testimony the government extended to the witness Chambers immunity from prosecution for his role in the two thefts. … . * * * ” We believe the evidence in question properly qualified as an exception to the general rule.

Butler v. United States

890 A.2d 181 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 12, 2006

Appellant’s counsel argued that the government was acting in bad faith “because clearly the police officers ... knew that there were other persons in the car.... … First, the defendant must show that the proposed testimony is (1) material, (2) clearly exculpatory, (8) non-cumulative, and (4) unobtainable from any other source. 684 A.2d at 341 .

Abney v. District of Columbia

580 A.2d 1036 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 28, 1990

It makes no mention of section 1-1212 nor does it in any other manner purport to implicate the District’s waiver of governmental immunity. … Indeed, the one rule that has been published in the District of Columbia Register, 18 DCMR § 712.4 (1987), clearly implies that an "emergency vehicle" does not cease to lose that status when its siren is not actually operating

Woodfield v. Providence Hospital

779 A.2d 933 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 6, 2001

Like the trial court, we shall assume for the sake of argument that appellant’s consent conferred only a qualified rather than an absolute privilege, and that appellees’ immunity from liability was de-feasible by a showing … Sigal is clearly distinguishable because it involved a negative employment recommendation by a recommender who "had never supervised, worked with, evaluated, or read an evaluation of" the defamed party.

J.C. v. DC

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 27, 2018

The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the District on all of the parents’ claims, concluding that the District was not subject to liability because it was entitled to qualified immunity on the § 1983 claims … immunity or absolute immunity, or the trial court’s reasoning to determine whether immunity was properly granted.

Daye v. United States

733 A.2d 321 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jul 15, 1999

The prosecutor went on to establish that the “letter” was a form of grant of immunity to Clay which provided that his truthful testimony in the grand jury would not be used against him in a prosecution for possessing (or … But when the jury learned from her questioning that Clay and Hairston finally told her or the police “what really happened,” it clearly knew what they had told her.

In Re Borders

665 A.2d 1381 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 26, 1995

The Subcommittee and Committee decided not to seek immunity for petitioner, because of the likelihood that he would refuse to testify even with immunity and the delay that seeking prosecution for criminal contempt would occasion … He refused to answer the questions despite a grant of immunity and was held in civil contempt.

District of Columbia v. 17M Associates, LLC

98 A.3d 954 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 4, 2014

Code § 47-825.01a; Real Property Tax Appeals Commission Establishment Act of 2010, D.C. … Code § 47-813—that is, qualified to determine how, but not whether, a tax applies.

Aiken v. United States

956 A.2d 33 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Sep 11, 2008

for informal (ie., non-statutory) promises of immunity, 51 and to testimony covered by statutory grants of blanket immunity. 52 A Kastigar hearing, in which the government must establish that its evidence is not derived … Clearly, however, if the statute does not provide use immunity fully coextensive with the protections of the Fifth Amendment, see supra note 37, the respondent cannot be compelled to testify at the CPO hearing over a valid

District of Columbia v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp.

940 A.2d 163 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Jan 10, 2008

Singer, Sutherland Statutory Construction § 47.17 (5th ed. 1992)), the court reasoned that “the specific cases given as examples in the predicate exception are clearly those involving violations of statutes regulating the … The plaintiffs read this language as saying nothing about a legislature’s power retroactively to “create immunities ... or to eliminate statutorily created causes of action.”

Wilson v. United States

590 A.2d 1002 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 8, 1991

Accordingly, we hold that there was evidence to support the trial judge’s findings and that they are not clearly erroneous. Derrington v. … Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526-27 , 105 S.Ct. 2806, 2817 , 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985) (qualified immunity from suit, as distinct from “a mere defense to liability,” immediately appealable since the trial judge’s decision “is effectively

Budoo v. United States

677 A.2d 51 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · May 30, 1996

However, we review the trial court’s factual findings under a “clearly erroneous” standard. See Griffin v. United States, 618 A.2d 114, 117 (D.C.1992). … Judge von Kann contrasted this type of immunity with “so-called limited immunity” which is "immunity respecting certain matters but not others.”

WMATA v. Nash-Flegler

District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 14, 2022

While Mitchell concerned a qualified immunity defense, its reasoning applies just as readily to a sovereign immunity defense. … Under section 80 of the compact establishing WMATA and conferring immunity upon it, WMATA’s immunity extends to acts “occurring in the performance of a governmental function,” but does not protect it from suits for “torts

District of Columbia v. North Washington Neighbors, Inc.

367 A.2d 143 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Dec 22, 1976

The tort theory advanced by appellees raises a substantial question of sovereign immunity. … Furthermore, the Supreme Court has indicated that the exercise of discretion which enjoys tort immunity “includes determinations made by executives or administrators in establishing plans, specifications or schedules of operations

Mosrie v. Trussell

467 A.2d 475 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Oct 5, 1983

While Mosrie has shown evidence of ill will on the part of Trussell, he has not shown that the qualified privilege of Trus-sell was not otherwise established by the occasion and proper purpose. … This is grounds for suspicion, and Trussell was clearly privileged to request an investigation.

Egbuka v. United States

968 A.2d 511 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Apr 2, 2009

Thereafter, the record on appeal was completed and this court established a briefing schedule for Egbuka’s appeal from his 1999 judgment of conviction. … Clearly, these cases do not contemplate that a trial judge other than the judge who presided over the trial will be tasked with preparing the substitute statement.

Winter v. Brown Ex Rel. Brown

365 A.2d 381 · District of Columbia Court of Appeals · Nov 1, 1976

They argue that even if some loss was sustained, appellees have failed to establish what their damages are. … Clearly, appellees’ counsel chose the more prudent course when they elected to pursue the instant action rather than a more limited suit. 8 Turning to another point raised by appellants, we conclude the trial court did not