Legal Opinion
Charles v. Charles
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided February 27, 1986No. 84-1576PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FERREN, Associate Judge:
Court-appointed defense counsel in this divorce action contends that, absent an applicable statute or court rule, the trial court erred in assessing attorney’s fees against him personally for failure to comply with court orders to respond to plaintiff’s complaint. Based on Roadway Express, Inc. v. Piper, 447 U.S. 752, 100 S.Ct. 2455, 65 L.Ed.2d 488 (1980), we conclude the trial court had inherent power to impose this sanction, provided the court found counsel had acted in bad faith. Because the court did not make such a finding, we reverse and remand for further…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Link v. Wabash RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- United States v. United Mine Workers of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Roadway Express, Inc. v. PiperSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- McComb v. Jacksonville Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Moakley v. SmallwoodSupreme Court of Florida · 2002
- Synanon Foundation, Inc. v. BernsteinDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1986
- Van Eps v. JohnstonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1988
- Delacruz v. HarrisDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2001
- In Re Estate of WilsonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2007
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.