Legal Opinion
Hinkle v. Sam Blanken & Co., Inc.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided April 14, 1986No. 84-684PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BELSON, Associate Judge:
Appellants seek reversal of an order entering judgment by default for failure to make discovery in a contract action for the recovery of a commission. We hold that the motions court did not abuse its discretion in entering the default judgment and denying appellants’ motion for reconsideration. Accordingly, we affirm.
I
At issue is the sanction imposed on appellants James A. Hinkle and Wilmer L. Johnson for failure to make discovery. Appel-lee Sam Blanken & Company, Inc., a business chance broker, initiated the civil action by filing a complaint alleging breach of…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Braxton v. Howard UniversityDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1984
- Firestone v. HarrisDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1980
- Himmelfarb v. GreenspoonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1980
- Ungar Motors v. AbdemoulaieDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1983
- Pollock v. BrownDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1978
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Weiner v. KnellerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1989
- Lyons v. JordanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1987
- Clay v. DeeringDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
- Iannucci v. PearlsteinDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1993
- District of Columbia v. GreeneDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.