Legal Opinion · Concurring in the judgment
Castro v. Security Assurance Management, Inc.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided May 26, 2011No. 09-AA-807Published
1Concurring in the judgmentSchwelb, Senior Judge
I agree with the court that the decision of the OAH is supported by substantial evidence in the record and that it should be affirmed. In my opinion, however, two of the issues, one relating to the denial of Castro’s motion for a subpoena, and the other concerning Castro’s unorthodox (but unopposed) Appendix,2 warrant more detailed discussion. Before reaching these issues, I set forth in greater detail the context in which they arise.
I
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
In April, 2008, Castro was hired by Security as a Special Police Officer. In late June of that year, Castro was granted a leave…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Koon v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- First Capitol Mortgage Corp. v. Talandis Construction Corp.Illinois Supreme Court · 1976
- In re S.G.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
- Broadcast Music, Inc. v. Havana Madrid Restaurant Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1949
- Perkins v. District of Columbia Department of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1984
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.