judyrecords
search tips
740 million+
United States Court Cases

District Of Columbia Court Of Appeals Record

LES HALLES WASHINGTON V. D.C. ONE ASSOCIATES LTD.

Case Information: 05-CV-1244
Short Caption:LES HALLES WASHINGTON V. D.C. ONE ASSOCIATES LTD.Classification:Appeals - Civil - Landlord And Tenant
Superior Court or Agency Case Number:LTB15067-05Filed Date:10/17/2005

Opening Event Date:10/17/2005Case Status:Closed
Record Completed:Post-Decision Matter Pending:
Briefs Completed:
Argued/Submitted:
Disposition:Next Scheduled Action:
Mandate Issued:02/21/2006

Party Information
Appellate RoleParty NameIFPAttorney(s)Arguing AttorneyE-Filer
AppellantLes Halles Washington N
Scott H. RomeNY
Andrew J KlineNY
AppelleeD.C. One Associates Ltd.N
Michael D. Maloney NN

Events
Event DateStatusDescriptionResult
10/17/2005NOTICE OF APPEAL
11/09/2005 On consideration of the notice of appeal filed in this case on October 17, 2005, it is ORDERED that appellant shall, within 20 days from the date of this order, complete and file with this court a single copy of the attach ed statement regarding transcript. Where transcript(s) necessary for this appeal have been ordered and completed for non-appeal purposes, appellant must advise the Court Reporting Division to forward said transcript(s) for inclusion in the record on appeal. If partial transcripts are being ordered, appellant must file a statement of issues to be raised on appeal with this court within 10 days from the date of this order. See D.C. App. R. 10 (b)(3)(A). It is FURTHER ORDERED appellant's failure to respond to any order of this court, including this order, shall subject this appeal to dismissal without further notice for lack of prosecution. See D.C. App. R. 13(a). (GP) elp
11/09/2005APPELLANT'S MOTION FOR STAY-writ of restitution
11/14/2005APPELLEE'S OPPOSITION to aple's emergency mot to stay writ of restitution.
11/15/2005TMC - appellant's (EMERGENCY) motion to stay - opposition
11/15/2005ORDER DENYING APPELLANT EMERGENCY MOTION FOR STAY. Appellant has failed to demonstrate either a likelihood of success on the merits of its claim that the Superior Court abused its discretion in permitting the appellee to amend its complaint and denying appellant motion for continuance, or that it will be irreparably harmed in the absence of a stay. See Barry v. Washington Post Co., 529 A.2d 319, 321 (D.C. 1987). Appellant's arguments elevate from over substance, ignore the plain language of Superior Ct. Civ. R. 15 (b), fail to demonstrate actual prejudice, and are flatly contradicted by the record showing its actual knowledge of the amounts owed and accruing. See Ernestine v. Yancey, 680 A.2d 1380, 1385 (D.C. 1986); Moore v. Moore, 391 A.2d 762, 768 (D.C. 1978). (SCGLNW)
11/22/2005STATEMENT REGARDING TRANSCRIPT(S) (RT - ORDERED 10/12/05) lw
01/24/2006STIPULATION TO DISMISS APPEAL (joint)
01/26/2006 On consideration of the stipulation of dismissal filed by the parties, it is ORDERED that this appeal is hereby dismissed, and all remaining costs and fees to be paid by appellant. See D.C. App. R. 13 (b)(2). (ETW) elp
01/26/2006DISMISSED
02/21/2006MANDATE ISSUED