Legal Opinion · Dissent

Mendes v. Johnson

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided June 13, 1978No. 10279Published

1DissentNebeker, Associate Judge

The exercise of judicial power to change the law should be undertaken only with the greatest caution and only upon necessity, for in changing the law we necessarily defeat the expectations of those who relied upon its predictability. Because the instant case can properly be decided within the framework of existing law, I am unwilling to join the majority in their use of this case as an occasion for effecting a change in the law.

Snitman v. Goodman, D.C.Mun.App., 118 A.2d 394 (1955), the existing law which the majority have deemed to be in unavoidable conflict with the result desired in the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. M. A. P. v. RyanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1971
  2. Mayor of South Memphis v. HowardTennessee Supreme Court · 1855
  3. Allison v. HodoCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1951
  4. Snitman v. GoodmanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1955
  5. Burford v. KrauseDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1950

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API