Legal Opinion
Paul Zukerberg v. District of Columbia Board of Elections and Ethics
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided August 21, 2014No. 14-CV-222PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
EASTERLY, Associate Judge:
In 2010, the District of Columbia Charter was amended to allow District residents to elect their Attorney General. In this case, the court considered whether that amendment required the first election for the office of Attorney General to be held in 2014. We heard oral argument on May 29, 2014. On June 4, 2014, we issued an order holding that the District must schedule an election in 2014 or, if that is not practically possible, as soon as practically possible in 2015. We thus reversed the trial court’s dismissal of the suit brought by Mr. Zukerberg seeking to…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Schwegmann Bros. v. Calvert Distillers Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Peoples Drug Stores, Inc. v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1983
- Shook v. District of Columbia Financial Responsibility & Management Assistance AuthorityCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1998
- Tippett v. DalyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2010
- District of Columbia v. PlaceDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2006
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- District of Columbia v. ExxonMobil Oil Corp.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2017
- Carragher v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2020
- District of Columbia v. ExxonMobil Oil Corp.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2017
- District of Columbia v. ExxonMobil Oil Corp.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2017
- Fraternal Order of Police-Metropolitan Police Department Labor Committee v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2023
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.