Legal Opinion
PAMELA B. STUART v. BARBARA J. WALKER
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided July 28, 2016No. 14-CV-1443PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BLACKBURNE-RIGSBY, Associate Judge:
Pro se appellant Pamela B. Stuart, a member of the District of Columbia Bar, appeals the trial court’s granting of a motion to. compel arbitration,, pursuant to D.C. Bar R. XIII, 1 to resolve a fee dispute with her former client, pro se appellee Barbara J. Walker. 2 Ms. Stuart contends that this court lacked the authority to promulgate Rule XIII under the District of Columbia Court Reform and Criminal Procedure Act of 1970 (“Court Reform Act”), D.C.Code § ll-2501(a) (2012 Repl.), the Home Rule Act, D.C.Code § l-206.02(a)(4) (2012 Repl.), and the United…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- M. A. P. v. RyanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1971
- Borough of Duryea v. GuarnieriSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Aguilar v. LernerCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
- In Re Application of LiVolsiSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1981
- In re MartinDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2013
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. v. HagenbergDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2017
- C.R. Calderon Construction, Inc. v. Grunley Construction Company, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2021