Legal Opinion

Berenbaum v. Berenbaum

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided March 15, 1994No. 92-FM-1506PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

Appellant Linda Bayer Berenbaum appeals the denial of her motion to extend the time for filing an appeal on the ground of excusable neglect. See Super.Ct.Civ.R. 60(b). The trial judge found, after a hearing, that it was undisputed that appellant’s trial attorney had been instructed by appellant not to file a notice of appeal as her attorney, that he had agreed only to facilitate the filing of such notice, that she had signed pro se, and that appellant so understood her trial attorney’s limited role. The judge found no basis to conclude that appellant had been affirmatively misled by her trial…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Link v. Wabash RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. Fallen v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
  3. United States v. Michael Paul HouserCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
  4. Lynch v. Meridian Hill Studio Apts., Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1985
  5. Reinsurance Company of America, Inc. v. Administratia Asigurarilor De Stat (Administration of State Insurance)Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. In re AK. V.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2000
  2. Killingham v. Wilshire Investments Corp.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1999
  3. Killingham v. Wilshire Investments Corp.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1999

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API