Legal Opinion
IN RE EDWARD T. SMITH BRUCE E. GARDNER
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided May 12, 2016No. 13-PR-1034PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THOMPSON, Associate Judge:
Appellant, Bruce E. Gardner, Esq., asserts in this appeal that he is “entitled to compensation from the Guardianship Fund for the time he spent protecting his rights to compensation in appeals to this Court that are related to his appointment as guardian ánd the guardianship duties he performed.” He seeks a remand to the Superior Court for that court to reconsider his fee petition and “to determine the rea-sonablenes's of the compensation” he requested for his appellate work. For the reasons discussed below, we agree that the Superior Court is authorized to approve…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- New York State Conference of Blue Cross & Blue Shield Plans v. Travelers InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Johnson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979
- Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc. v. DabitSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Peoples Drug Stores, Inc. v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1983
- Maracich v. SpearsSupreme Court of the United States · 2013
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- In re BinghamDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2022
- In re Edward T. Smith Bruce E. GardnerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2023
- In re GardnerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2022
- In re Glass ChristianDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2024
- In re Pearl Robinson Bruce E. GardnerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2023
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.