Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Fairman v. District of Columbia

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided October 25, 2007No. 02-CV-650Published

1ConcurrenceSteadman, Senior Judge

Principles of judicial and equitable es-toppel applicable to private parties do not translate readily where the government is a litigant and considerations of protection of the public físc and the public interest are involved. See, e.g., District of Columbia v. Gould, 852 A.2d 50, 56-57 (D.C. 2004); Mamo v. District of Columbia, 934 A.2d 876, 386-87 (2007). However, in the particular and special circumstances presented here, coupled with the discretionary nature of permitting new arguments to be made even by the government for the first time on appeal, see, e.g., District of Columbia v. Wical…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. District of Columbia v. Wical Ltd. PartnershipDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1993
  2. District of Columbia v. GouldDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2004
  3. Hall v. GalloConnecticut Superior Court · 2007

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API