Legal Opinion
Landise v. Mauro
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided May 31, 2007No. 04-CV-499PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
KING, Senior Judge:
Sarah Landise appeals from an interlocutory order directing her to deposit an *1028additional $5,000 into the court registry pursuant to D.C.Code § 15-703(b) (2001). She contends that the trial court abused its discretion in directing her to post additional security where she had prevailed at trial on the issue of liability.1 For the reasons set forth below, we conclude that the trial court’s order is not appealable at this stage of the proceedings.
I
Landise, an attorney, initiated this litigation against Thomas Mauro alleging breach of a partnership agreement. The parties had…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Carson v. American Brands, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Seguros Banvenez, S.A. v. S/S Oliver DrescherCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1985
- Cohen v. Board Of Trustees Of The University Of Medicine And Dentistry Of New JerseyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1989
- Dameron v. Capitol House Associates Ltd. PartnershipDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1981
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- SARAH LANDISE v. THOMAS MAURO.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2016