Legal Opinion
Olevsky v. District of Columbia
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided September 16, 1988No. 85-331PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SCHWELB, Associate Judge:
Laws making it a crime for an employer willfully to refuse to pay those in his employ the wages that are properly due are said to have as their purpose the protection of employees from “the greed of corporate capital.” State v. Feist, 115 R.I. 201, 341 A.2d 725, 728 (1975). The principal question in this case is whether an individual employer charged with transgressing such proscriptions, who claims to be unable to afford his own attorney, is entitled to a free lawyer pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act. Although an allegedly exploitive capitalist is probably not the…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- North Carolina v. PearceSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Duncan v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Griggs v. Duke Power Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Washington v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Argersinger v. HamlinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Hunter v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
- Gamble v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2011
- Browner v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
- Turner v. BaylyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1996
- State v. WoodcockCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 1995
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.