Legal Opinion
Dillard v. Yeldell
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided March 17, 1975No. 8846PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
NEBEKER, Associate Judge:
This motion presents the question whether a $25 filing fee can be assessed against officers of the District of Columbia Department of Human Resources (DHR) in their official capacity. A petition for a writ in the nature of mandamus to compel required agency action was dismissed as moot because the officers tardily performed the actions requested after the petition was filed. Costs are awarded to petitioners.
Petitioners are claimants before DHR. Each petitioner was granted a favorable decision under the procedures set out by the District of Columbia City Council in…
2Cases cited54 opinions
- Ex Parte PetersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- Kendall v. United States Ex Rel. StokesSupreme Court of the United States · 1838
- Reconstruction Finance Corporation v. JG Menihan Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Ancheta v. DalyWashington Supreme Court · 1969
- Duncan Townsite Co. v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- 1901 Wyoming Avenue Cooperative Ass'n v. LeeDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1975
- Timus v. District of Columbia Department of Human RightsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1993
- Medina v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2007
- Baehr Bros. v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Nadler v. Immigration & Naturalization ServiceDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1989
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.