Grier v. Rowland
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
1Per curiam
Appellants’ civil action was dismissed ex parte for failure to comply with an order requiring discovery of documents and records. This discovery order had been entered thirteen days earlier, also ex parte, and in derogation of the notice requirements of the Superior Court Civil Rules. Upon learning of the dismissal, appellants filed a Motion to Reinstate the action, asserting as grounds that due process was denied them by the lack of any notice of, or an opportunity to be heard in opposition to, the Motion to Compel Discovery. The Motion to Reinstate was denied and this timely appeal…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Societe Internationale Pour Participations Industrielles Et Commerciales, S. A. v. RogersSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Russell Weedon and Wilbert F. Weedon v. John GadenCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1969
- Pollock v. BrownDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1978
- United Retail Cleaners & Tailors Ass'n v. DenahanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1945
3Cited by10 opinions
- Puckrein v. JenkinsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2005
- Samuels v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1981
- Shimer v. EdwardsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1984
- Simpson v. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1987
- Sandine v. DerwinskiUnited States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · 1990
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.