Legal Opinion · Concurring in the judgment
Mallof v. District of Columbia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided May 17, 2012No. 10-AA-1427Published
1Concurring in the judgmentSchwelb, Senior Judge
I agree with my colleagues in the majority that the Board is not authorized to terminate the voluntary agreement without first making the findings specified in subsections (A) and (B) of D.C.Code § 25-446(d)(4), as well as the finding in subsection (C). Accordingly, I concur in the reversal of the Board’s order. I write separately, however, because I find the issue substantially more difficult than my colleagues do.
In its opinion, the majority refers repeatedly to the “plain language” and the “plain meaning” of the statute, and relies on decisions in which the statutory language was…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Peoples Drug Stores, Inc. v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1983
- Tenants of 738 Longfellow Street, N.W. v. District of Columbia Rental Housing CommissionDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
- Superior Beverages, Inc. v. District of Columbia Alcoholic Beverage Control BoardDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1989
- Baghini v. District of Columbia Department of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1987
- Howard University Hospital v. District of Columbia Department of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2010
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.