Legal Opinion
Araya v. Keleta
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided May 12, 2011No. Nos. 09-FM-1203, 09-FM-1204PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
2Per curiam
On consideration of the motion of counsel for appellant to withdraw, appellant’s pro se motion to supplement the record and to expedite the appeal, the opinion and judgment of this court affirming the trial court’s order appealed from, and appellant’s pro se emergency motion to correct *79or amend said opinion while a petition for rehearing en banc is pending, it is
ORDERED that the motion of counsel for appellant is granted, nunc pro tunc to the time of filing in this court, and it is
FURTHER ORDERED that appellant’s pro se motion to supplement the record and to expedite the appeal is denied…
3Cases cited9 opinions
- United States v. W. T. Grant Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1953
- State Ex Rel. Williams v. MarshSupreme Court of Missouri · 1982
- Cruz-Foster v. FosterDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1991
- Hemily v. HemilyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979
- Sanders v. SandersDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by4 opinions
- ALFREDO SALVATERRO v. ISELA RAMIREZDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2014
- ALFREDO SALVATERRO v. ISELA RAMIREZDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2014
- ALFREDO SALVATERRO v. ISELA RAMIREZDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2014
- Ramirez v. SalvatteraDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2020