Legal Opinion
In re Edward T. Smith Bruce E. Gardner
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided September 18, 2014No. 12-PR-436 & 12-PR-1582PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FISHER, Associate Judge:
Appellant Bruce E. Gardner challenges the denial of his requests for compensation, claiming that because he was appointed as “conservator” of Edward T. Smith after D.C.Code § 21-1501 had been repealed and because he performed the duties of a guardian and conservator as described in D.C.Code §§ 21-2047 and 21-2070 (the Guardianship Act), he is eligible to receive compensation from' the Guardianship Fund. We conclude that Mr. Gardner is not eligible to receive compensation from the Guardianship Fund for services rendered under his original appointment in 1998, but he is…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- In Re OrshanskyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2008
- Sullivan v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2003
- District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department v. StanleyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2008
- Ellen D. Mitchell v. Cynthia D. Ensor, Ellen D. Mitchell v. Cynthia D. EnsorCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1969
- In re Estate of BryantDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1999
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- IN RE EDWARD T. SMITH BRUCE E. GARDNERDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2016
- In re Edward T. Smith Bruce E. GardnerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2023
- In re WeaksDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2020