Foster v. Canan

661 A.2d 636, 1995 D.C. App. LEXIS 144, 1995 WL 422213
District of Columbia Court of Appeals·Decided June 14, 1995·No. 94-SP-1432·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

The division is of the opinion that the issue presented by the petition has been resolved against petitioner by this court’s combined decisions in Browner v. District of Columbia, 549 A.2d 1107 (D.C.1988); Olevsky v. District of Columbia, 548 A.2d 78 (D.C.1988); In re Thompson, 454 A.2d 1324 (D.C.1982); and Scott v. District of Columbia, 122 A.2d 579 (D.C.1956). Even if that were not the case, the division is unable to conclude, in light of these decisions, that the right to a petition for a writ of mandamus is “ ‘clear and indisputable’ ” in this case. Gulfstream Aerospace Corp. v. Mayacamas Corp., 485 U.S. 271, 289, 108 S.Ct. 1133, 1143-44, 99 L.Ed.2d 296 (1988) (quoting Bankers Life & Casualty Co. v. Holland, 346 U.S. 379, 74 S.Ct. 145, 98 L.Ed. 106 (1953)). It is

FURTHER ORDERED that this case is removed from the oral argument calendar for Monday, June 19, 1995. It is

FURTHER ORDERED by the division, sua sponte, that the Clerk shall poll the full court regarding whether this case shall be heard by the court en banc.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Foster v. Canan, 661 A.2d 636, 1995 D.C. App. LEXIS 144, 1995 WL 422213 (D.C. 1995).

661 A.2d 636 (Foster v. Canan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Holiday v. United States
683 A.2d 61 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1996)
Turner v. Bayly
673 A.2d 596 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1996)
Stebbins v. Stebbins
673 A.2d 184 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1996)
Foote v. United States
670 A.2d 366 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1996)