Legal Opinion
Cruz v. Sarmiento
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided September 2, 1999No. 97-FM-1060, 97-FM-1180PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
TERRY, Associate Judge:
This is an appeal from the denial of a motion to set aside a default divorce judgment obtained by appellee Sarmiento. Appellant Cruz contends that the trial court abused its discretion when it refused to reopen the case, arguing that the judge who originally entered the default judgment erred when she granted Mr. Sarmiento’s motion for substituted service by publication. According to Ms. Cruz, Mr. Sarmiento’s motion was deficient because it lacked information required by D.C.Code § 13-338 (1996) and by our decision in Bearstop v. Bearstop, 377 A.2d 405 (D.C.1977). For…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Andrade v. JacksonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979
- Clarence Austin v. Otis SmithCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1962
- Clark v. MolerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1980
- Dunn v. ProfittDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Miranda v. ContrerasDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2000
- Threatt v. WinstonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2006
- Fox v. GinsburgDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2001
- M.D. v. R.W.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2018
- M.D. v. R.W. and L.P. v. M.D.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2018