Legal Opinion

Shpritz v. District of Columbia

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided September 7, 1978No. 13027PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

NEBEKER, Associate Judge:

Appellants assert that the trial court erred in entering judgment for the District of Columbia, as defendant, at the conclusion of a bench trial. We affirm.

The evidence at trial tended to prove the following circumstances. Prior to September 1971, appellants had been controlling stockholders and directors of Associated Opticians, a District of Columbia corporation which had become tax-indebted to the federal government in an amount in excess of $30,000. In that month, appellants sold their controlling interest in the corporation to another corporation. Subsequently,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Aquilino v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
  2. Almi, Inc. v. Dick Corp.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  3. Savings Bank of Danbury v. LoeweSupreme Court of the United States · 1917
  4. Industrial Bank of Washington v. United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1970
  5. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. WrennDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1937

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Estate of Heiser v. Islamic Republic of IranDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2011
  2. Ehab Asal v. Estate of MinaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2021

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

Powered by the Exa API