judyrecords
search tips
740 million+
United States Court Cases

District Of Columbia Court Of Appeals Record

DANIELLE CESARANO V. REED SMITH, LLP

Case Information: 07-CV-1065
Short Caption:DANIELLE CESARANO V. REED SMITH, LLPClassification:Appeals - Civil - Torts
Superior Court or Agency Case Number:CAB8644-03Filed Date:09/17/2007

Opening Event Date:09/17/2007Case Status:Closed
Record Completed:12/07/2007Post-Decision Matter Pending:
Briefs Completed:04/30/2008
Argued/Submitted:02/24/2009
Disposition:Next Scheduled Action:
Mandate Issued:03/25/2010

Party Information
Appellate RoleParty NameIFPAttorney(s)Arguing AttorneyE-Filer
Amicus-AppellantMetropolitan Washington Employment Lawyers AssoN
Douglas B. Huron YN
AppellantDanielle Cesarano N
Bruce A. Fredrickson YN
Cedar P. CarltonNN
AppelleeReed Smith LlpN
Jonathan R. Mook YN
Bernard J. Dimuro NN

Events
Event DateStatusDescriptionResult
09/17/2007NOTICE OF APPEAL
10/01/2007STATEMENT- from aplt certificate regarding transcripts (NO-RT NEEDED FOR THIS APPEAL) (elp)
10/04/2007 On consideration of the notice of appeal filed in this case and it appearing that this appeal meets the initial criteria for inclusion in the mandatory mediation program, See Administrative Order M229-07, it is ORDERED that counsel for all parties must, within 20 days from the date of this order, individually complete and file with this court two (2) copies of the attached screening statement. Motions for extensions of time to file this form must give specific reasons for a short extension and are not looked upon favorably. If after review of all information the case is selected for inclusion in the mandatory mediation program, counsel will be contacted by the Senior Judge assigned as mediator and must comply with all provisions of administrative order M229-07. If the case is not selected, the appeal will proceed without any delay. It is FURTHER ORDERED that failure of the parties to comply with this order may result in the imposition of sanctions. (GP) elp
10/23/2007CIVIL APPEALS SCREENING STATEMENT aplt
10/24/2007CIVIL APPEALS SCREENING STATEMENT aple
11/08/2007NO MEDIATION
12/07/2007RECORD INDEX
12/07/2007RECORD COMPLETED
12/12/2007 It appearing that the complete record on appeal has been filed with this court, and it further appearing that the court has not directed this matter to mediation, it is ORDERED that appellant's brief and the appendix including the documents required by D.C. App. R. 30 (a)(1), shall be filed within 40 days from the date of this order, and appellee's brief shall be filed within 30 days thereafter. See D.C. App. R. 31. (GP) elp
01/16/2008APPELLANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY REVERSAL w/ exhibits
01/17/2008TMC - motion for summary reversal - appellant's motion to extend time to file reply to appellee's opposition appellee's opposition - appellee's motion for leave to file (LODGED) exhibits to opposition UNDER SEAL - appellant's motion for leave to file (LODGED) exhibit under seal - appellant's reply in support of motion for summary reversal
01/18/2008APLE MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE ANSWER/RESPONSEuntil February 5, 2008 (unopposed)
01/23/2008 On consideration of appellee's unopposed motion to extend time to respond to appellant's motion for summary reversal, it is ORDERED that the motion is granted and appellee's response, if any, shall be filed no later than February 5, 2008. (BY: GP) lw
01/30/2008APLT MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE ANSWER/RESPONSE to appellee's opposition to 1/15/08 *****NOT YET FILED LW
02/05/2008APPELLEE'S OPPOSITION to aplt's mot for summary reversal.
02/05/2008APPELLEE'S MISCELLANEOUS PROCEDURAL MOTION to file under seal exhibits to aple's oppo to aplt's mot for summary reversal. (no oppo)
02/05/2008RECEIVED - aple's exhibits to aple's oppo to aplt's mot for summary reversal.
02/15/2008RECEIVED - appellant's reply in support of motion for summery reversal LW
02/15/2008APPELLANT'S MISCELLANEOUS PROCEDURAL MOTION for leave to file Uner Seal Exhibits to Reply in support of Summary Reversal.
02/20/2008 ORDERED that the CONSENT MOTIONS ARE GRANTED and the Clerk WILL FILE all supporting materials under seal. It is FURTHER ORDERED that appellant's MOTION FOR LEAVE IS GRANTED and the Clerk WILL FILE the lodged reply. It is *****MORE*****
02/20/2008MISCELLANEOUS: EXHIBITS A-D to Appellee's Opposition to the Motion for Summary Reversal ****************SEALED*****************
02/20/2008APPELLANT'S REPLY in support of appellant's motion for summary reversal
02/20/2008MISCELLANEOUS: EXHIBITS to appellant's reply in support of motion for summary reversal ****************SEALED*****************
02/20/2008 FURTHER ORDERED that the MOTION FOR SUMMARY REVERSAL IS DENIED. The facts are neither simple nor clear-cut and the issues presented do not lend themselves to such disposition. See Oliver T. Carr Mgm't, Inc v. Nat'l Delicatessen, Inc, 397 A.2d 914, 915 (D.C. 1979). It is *****MORE*****
02/20/2008 FURTHER ORDERED that appellant shall file her brief within 40 days from the date of this orer, appellee its response within 30 days thereafter, and appellant her reply, if any, within 21 additiaonal days. D.C. App. R. 31. (GLFIST)
03/31/2008APPELLANT'S BRIEF ***********FILE UNDER SEAL*****************
03/31/2008FiledAPPENDIX- vol I Thru XI - 1 White box of sealed appendix vol. I Thru XI
03/31/2008APPELLANT'S MISCELLANEOUS PROCEDURAL MOTION joint motion to file appendix under seal
04/04/2008 On consideration of the joint motion to file appendix under seal, and it appearing that these documents were subject to a protective order in Superior Court, it is ORDERED that the motion is granted and the Clerk shall file the appendix under seal. (ETW) elp
04/04/2008 APPENDIX ******FILED UNDER SEAL************* (APPENDIX IN RM O47A BE5) ALONZO
04/07/2008AMICUS CURIAE'S BRIEF
04/09/2008APPELLEE'S MISCELLANEOUS PROCEDURAL MOTION to seal aplt's brief anf to file aple's brief and aplt's reply rief under seal joint
04/15/2008 On consideration of the joint motion to file appellant's brief, appellee's brief, and appellant's reply brief under seal, it is ORDERED that the motion is granted and the Clerk shall file appellant's brief filed with this court on March 31, 2008, under seal. It is FURTHER ORDERED that appellee's brief and appellant's reply brief shall be filed under seal. (ETW) elp
04/30/2008APPELLEE'S BRIEF
04/30/2008BRIEFS COMPLETED
05/09/2008FINAL SCREENING - REGULAR CALENDAR
05/21/2008APPELLANT'S REPLY BRIEF
12/02/2008LETTER TO COUNSEL/PARTY RE FUTURE CALENDARING (Feb)
12/15/2008LETTER FROM COUNSEL/PARTY RE FUTURE CALENDARING aplt
12/23/2008AMICUS CURIAE MISCELLANEOUS PROCEDURAL MOTION to participate in oral argument
01/02/2009APPELLEE'S ANSWER/RESPONSE to Amicus Curiae motion to participate in oral argument.
01/06/2009CALENDAR NOTICE SENT
01/09/2009 On consideration of amicus curiae's motion to participate in oral argument, and the response thereto, it is ORDERED that the motion and the response are held in abeyance and referred to the merits panel upon assignment. See D.C. App. Rule 29 (g). (ETW) elp
02/11/2009On consideration of the motion to permit the Metropolitan Washington Employment Lawyers Association as amicus curiae to participate in oral argument by using 10 minutes of the time allotted to appellant, appellee's response thereto, and it appearing that this matter is scheduled on the regular calendar of February 24, 2009, it is ORDERED on behalf of the merits division assigned to consider this matter that the motion is granted and the Metropolitan Washington Employment Lawyers Association as amicus curiae may share the argument time allotted to appellant. (GP)
02/17/2009NOTICE RECEIVED that Atty Mook will argue on behalf of aple.
02/24/2009FiledACTION - Argued / Submitted
02/24/2009ARGUED before Reid,Fisher,King. Bruce A.Fredrickson Esq.,for appellant Danielle Cesarano. Stephen Chertkof Esq.,for Amic-Appellant Metropolitan Washington Employment. Jonathan R.Mook Esq.,for appellee Reed Smith.
04/16/2009CERTIFICATE PER RULE 28
05/05/2009APPELLEE'S MOTION TO STRIKE letter dated 4/16/09.
05/05/2009APPELLANT'S OPPOSITION to aple's motion to strike.
05/12/2009On consideration of appellee's motion to strike letter pursuant to D.C. App. R. 28(k), oppositon thereto, it is ORDERED that appellee's motion to strike is granted without prejudice to the filing by appellant of a rule 28(k) letter which only lists the supplemental authority counsel wishes to call to the attention of the court. (RD,FI,KG)
05/15/2009CERTIFICATE PER RULE 28 aplt
03/04/2010FiledAFFIRMED IN PART/REVERSED IN PART Opinion (Reid, Fisher, King) and Judgment affirming in part and reversing in part the judgment on appeal and remanding the case for further proceedings.
03/25/2010MANDATE ISSUED