Legal Opinion
Fox v. Ginsburg
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided November 15, 2001No. 00-CV-1280PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FARRELL, Associate Judge.
Appellee Ginsburg, Feldman & Bress (“GFB”) sued a former client, Dr. Kenneth Fox, for unpaid legal fees. In June 2000 the Superior Court entered a default judgment against Fox. Fox then filed a motion to vacate the default judgment, alleging that GFB had not properly effected service of process against him while he was domiciled in the Bahamas, so that the default judgment was invalid. See generally Cruz v. Sarmiento, 737 A.2d 1021, 1025-26 (D.C.1999). The trial court rejected the argument, concluding that GFB had adequately served Fox in compliance with Bahamian'…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- United States v. Bobby A. HoltonCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1997
- Cooper v. BurtonCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1942
- Cruz v. SarmientoDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1999
- Spevacek v. WrightDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1986
3Cited by3 opinions
- Wallace v. Eckert, Seamans, Cherin & Mellott, LLCDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2012
- Superior Fibre Products, Inc. v. United States Department of the TreasuryDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2016
- Skye Mineral Investors, LLC v. DXS Capital (U.S.) LimitedCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 2021