Legal Opinion
Ozerol v. Howard University
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided March 24, 1989No. 86-1057PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
STEADMAN, Associate Judge:
At trial, it was stipulated by Howard University that when tenured or tenure-track professors were paid in whole or in part from grant funds, “their employment papers, as far as the grant was concerned, had an expiration date.” In his petition for rehearing of our decision in this case, 545 A.2d 638 (D.C.1988), Ozerol asserts that both the trial court and this panel over-, looked the stipulation in giving weight to the fact that Ozerol’s employment papers contained specific termination dates.
The fact that the employment papers of tenured professors contained a…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Ozerol v. Howard UniversityDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
- Howard University v. BestDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
- Johnson v. Fairfax Village Condominium IV Unit Owners Ass'nDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
- Biggs v. StewartDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1976
3Cited by7 opinions
- Howard University v. Good Food Services, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
- Regan v. Spicer Hb, LLCDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2015
- Piedmont Resolution, LLC v. Johnston, Rivlin & FoleyDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1998
- Riggs Nat. Bank of Washington, DC v. WebsterDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1993
- Patel v. Howard UniversityDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1995
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.