Wasserman v. District of Columbia
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
1Per curiam
Appellant was fined $100 each on two counts of having allowed his dog to be “on [a] public space” without a leash, in violation of 24 DCMR § 900.3. He argues that the regulation is invalid, because the Commissioners (the then-governing administrative body in the District of Columbia) adopted it before the relevant congressional enabling legislation took effect. He argues, in the alternative, that he was entitled to a jury trial on the charges. We affirm.
In 1961, Congress was asked to empower the Commissioners to require dogs to be leashed when in public in the District. 1 Recognizing that…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Blanton v. City of North Las VegasSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- McClure v. Township of OxfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Moss v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
- Olafisoye v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2004
- Liter v. City of Baton RougeSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1971
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Parsons v. District of Columbia Board of Zoning AdjustmentDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2013