Cases

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA GREGORY A. SLATE, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 20-cv-3732 (BAH) v. Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell DIOP KAMAU, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION

Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Gregory Allen Slate, Misc. Docket AG No. 5, September Term, 2017 ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE – SANCTIONS – DISBARMENT – Court of Appeals disbarred lawyer who knowingly failed to disclose during bar application process that, in civil case to which lawyer was party, trial court found that lawyer had engaged in dishonesty and misconduct, and lawyer falsely stated to Bar Counsel that he had disclosed all required information during bar application process. Such conduct violated

Watts, J. This attorney discipline proceeding involves a lawyer who knowingly failed to disclose during the bar application process that, in a civil case to which the lawyer was a party, a trial court found that the lawyer had engaged in dishonesty and misconduct, and the lawyer falsely stated to Bar Counsel that he had disclosed all required information during the bar application pr

MEMORANDUM OPINION BERYL A. HOWELL, District Judge. The plaintiff Gregory Slate brings this copyright infringement action against the defendants ABC News, Inc., ABC News Interactive, Inc., and Disney/ABC International Television, Inc. (collectively, “ABC” or “ABC News”), seeking relief for what he claims was the willful and unauthorized use of les

MEMORANDUM OPINION BERYL A. HOWELL, District Judge. Plaintiff Gregory Slate appeals from a June 24, 2011 Order by the Magistrate Judge partially denying his Motion to Compel Discovery, ECF No. 77, from defendants American Broadcast Companies, Inc. (hereinafter “ABC”), ABC News Interactive (hereinafter “ANI”),

855 F.2d 1295 12 Fed.R.Serv.3d 298, 48 Ed. Law Rep. 1154 Kalima JENKINS, by her friend, Kamau AGYEI; Carolyn Dawson,by her next friend, Richard Dawson; Tufanza A. Byrd, by hernext friend, Teresa Byrd; Derek A. Dydell, by his nextfriend, Maurice Dydell; Terrance Cason, by his next friend,Antoria Cason; Jonathan Wiggins, by his next friend,Rosemary Jacobs Love; Kirk Allan Ward, by his next friend

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ANDREW CHIEN, Plaintiff v. Civil Action No. 18-2050 (CKK) RICHRAD J. FREER, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER (November 23, 2021) This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ [8] Motion to Dis

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BORIS ZAVADOVSKY, et al., : : : Plaintiffs, : Civil Action No.: 24-1997 (RC) : v. :

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA JOHN S. BARTH, Plaintiff, v. No. 25-cv-1136 (DLF) MABRY CARLTON RANCH INC., et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER John Barth, proceeding pro se, brings this action against several Florida-based individuals and entities, alleging that

ORDER CECILIA M. ALTONAGA, District Judge. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendant, Judicial Watch, Inc.’s (“Judicial Watch[’s]”) Motion for Summary Judgment ... (“Motion”) [ECF No. 83], filed with a Statement of Material Facts ... (“Defendant’s SF”) [ECF No. 81] on February 28, 2014. Plaintiff, Larry Klay-man (“Klayman”), filed his Opposition to Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judg

201 F.Supp.2d 618 (2002) COLLETON COUNTY COUNCIL; Steven Murdaugh, individually and in his official capacity as Chairman of Colleton County Council; Dr. Joseph Flowers, individually and in his official capacity as a member of Colleton County Council; Janice H. Alexander, Andrew F. Calcutt, Joseph Hamilton, Hazel Harrelson, Jas. P. Harrelson, William K. Padgett, Daisy F. Rizer, I.N. Rizer, David M. Smalls, A.L. Smoak, Jr., Kathleen V. Steedly, Wendell M.

JOHN R. GIBSON, Senior Circuit Judge. The State of Missouri again appeals, the second time in less than a year, an order of *1299the district court1 approving Milliken II2 quality education programs. Jenkins v. Missouri, No. 77-0420-CV-W-4, 1998 WL 566488 (W.D.Mo. July 30,

JOHN R. GIBSON, Circuit Judge. The Kansas City School District desegregation case is before us again and we now must consider the scope of the remedies ordered by the district court,1 specifically with respect to magnet schools and capital improvements, and the tax increases authorized to generate the Kansas City, Missouri School District’s share of the costs of these programs.2</