Legal Opinion
Breiner v. Daka, Inc.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided August 29, 2002No. 00-CV-1611PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RUIZ, Associate Judge:
This appeal arises from the Superior Court’s denial of James Breiner’s motion for attorneys’ fees following a jury award in his favor in an age discrimination action against Daka, Inc. The trial court based its ruling on Superior Court Civil Rule 54(d)(2)(B), which requires that a motion for fees be filed within fourteen days of entry of judgment. Breiner’s principal contention on appeal is that the fourteen-day requirement of Rule 54(d)(2)(B), which was imposed by an amendment that became effective on June 1, 1995, was not applicable to his case. We agree that the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- White v. New Hampshire Department of Employment SecuritySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Johnson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979
- Daka, Inc. v. BreinerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1998
- Dyer v. William S. Bergman & Associates, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1993
- Natural Motion by Sandra, Inc. v. District of Columbia Commission on Human RightsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1999
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- In Re Estate of YatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2010
- Coto v. CITIBANK FSBDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2006
- Purcell v. ThomasDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2011