Legal Opinion
Tate v. Equity Brokerage Corp.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided March 18, 1986No. 85-72PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
2Per curiam
Promptly following a judgment for appellee, appellants filed a “motion to vacate judgment or, in the alternative, for a new trial.” The motion, short in form and with little elaboration, was based on (1) additional evidence with respect to the lease and its importance, and (2) alleged improper conduct by defendant with respect to a potential witness. On December 13, 1984, the trial court denied the motion from the bench without hearing or argument. It construed the motion as one based on perjured testimony and deemed itself without authority to grant a new trial, citing Unger v. Unger,…
3Cases cited7 opinions
- Smith v. PollinCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1952
- Square Construction Company and La Fera Contracting Company v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit AuthorityCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1981
- Doepel v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1981
- Dowdy v. Hawfield. Dowdy v. HawfieldCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1951
- Unger v. UngerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1961
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by2 opinions
- Carter v. Cathedral Avenue Cooperative, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1987
- Laufer v. Westminster Brokers, Ltd.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1987