fedcity-ga,
As a DC resident myself -- and one who has had to battle the local
bureaucracy on occasion -- I was particularly intrigued by your
question.
Here are a number of cases that meet your criteria.
For each, I've cited the case and some excerpts to give you the
overall sense of it, and have provided contact information for the
lawyer who successfully led the case against the DC government.
If there is anything else you need here, do not hesitate to let me
know, and I'll be happy to continue working on this.
Cheers,
pafalafa-ga
===============
GEORGETOWN COLLEGE v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT
No. 01-AA-1182
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS
837 A.2d 58
December 4, 2003, Decided
COUNSEL: Deborah B. Baum, with whom Maureen E. Dwyer and Gerard M.
Babendreier were on the brief, for petitioner.
...the District of Columbia Board of Zoning Adjustment (BZA or the
Board) approved the Campus Plan of the President and Directors of
Georgetown College (Georgetown or the University), subject to nineteen
specific conditions. n1 The University has asked us to review these
conditions, contending, inter alia, that several of them are not
supported by substantial evidence, that some conditions address issues
not within the authority or competence of the Board, and that the
Board has improperly usurped the University's prerogatives by
intruding into the minutiae of university administration.
...we conclude that some of the conditions to which the University did
not consent must be struck down as arbitrary and capricious. In our
view, even considering the University's concessions, the Board has
involved itself in matters outside its expertise and has intruded to
an impermissible degree into the management prerogatives of the
University. Accordingly, we vacate the Board's order, as amended on
reconsideration, and remand the case for further proceedings
consistent with this opinion.
Deborah Brand Baum
Member
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
2300 N Street, NW
Washington, District of Columbia 20037-1128
Telephone: 202-663-8000
Fax: 202-663-8007
http://www.pillsburylaw.com/deborah.baum
===============
PARRECO v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA RENTAL HOUSING COMMISSION
No. 03-AA-1488
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS
885 A.2d 327
October 27, 2005, Decided
COUNSEL: Roger D. Luchs for petitioner.
...Petitioner challenges the decision of the District of Columbia
Rental Housing Commission ("RHC") affirming a determination by an
examiner of the Office of Adjudication of the Department of Consumer
and Regulatory Affairs that invalidated petitioner's rent increase for
failure to give tenant the statutorily-required notice.
...We agree with petitioner that the decision invalidating the rent
increase and imposing a fine was based on an issue the tenant never
raised and of which petitioner had no adequate notice. We also agree
that required findings were not made to justify imposition of the
second fine. Thus, we reverse and remand to the agency for further
proceedings.
Roger D. Luchs
Member
Greenstein DeLorme & Luchs, P.C.
1620 L Street, N.W., Suite 900
Washington, District of Columbia 20036-5605
Telephone: 202-452-1400
Facsimile: 202-452-1410
http://www.gdllaw.com/
===============
CASS v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
No. 99-CT-969
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS
829 A.2d 480; 2003 D.C. App.
July 31, 2003, Decided
COUNSEL: Thomas C. Willcox for appellant.
...Brett Cass was convicted of possessing an alcoholic beverage while
he was under twenty-one years of age, see D.C. Code § 25-130 (a)
(Supp. 2000), and sentenced to nine months of probation, under D.C.
Code § 25-130 (b-1), a $ 300 fine under D.C. Code § 25-130 (b-2), and
40 hours of community service work. While Cass does not dispute that
he violated the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act ("ABC Act"), he
contends that his infraction is not a crime punishable under D.C. Code
§ 25-130 (b-1) or any other provision of the ABC Act. He claims that
the only sanctions available for underage possession of alcohol are an
administrative fine and a temporary suspension of driving privileges,
which are civil in character and should not cause him to suffer the
ancillary penalties associated with a misdemeanor, such as, for
example, having to disclose the conviction on employment applications.
In the alternative, he suggests that the ABC Act is ambiguous, and any
doubts about its meaning should be resolved in his favor under the
rule of lenity.
...We thus concur with Cass - albeit for very different reasons - that
the only penalties available for the possession of alcohol by a person
under twenty-one are civil: a fine pursuant to the Civil Infractions
Act, D.C. Code §§ 6-2701 to 2723 , see D.C. Code § 25-130 (b-2), and
the suspension of driving privileges under D.C. Code § 25-130 (c). We
therefore reverse the judgment of the trial court sentencing Cass to
nine months probation under D.C. Code § 25-130 (b-1).
Thomas C. Willcox
Willcox & Hager
(202) 638-7541
601 Indiana Ave NW
Washington, DC 20004
===============
POWELL v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
No. 96-AA-1347
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS
818 A.2d 188; 2003 D.C. App.
March 13, 2003, Decided
Petition for Review of a Decision of the District of Columbia Housing Authority.
COUNSEL: Phillip C. Zane for petitioner
...Dollean Powell appeals the decision of the District of Columbia
Housing Authority (DCHA) to terminate her eligibility for housing
subsidies under the Tenant Assistance Program (TAP) for "fraudulently"
under-reporting her income in order to obtain more assistance
...We concur with Powell that DCHA's findings of fact were
insufficient, and reverse and remand this matter for further
proceedings.
Phillip C. Zane
Of Counsel
Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC
Lincoln Square, 6th Floor, 555 Eleventh Street, N.W.
Washington, District of Columbia 20004
Telephone: 202-508-3400
Fax: 202-508-3402
http://www.bakerdonelson.com/Content.aspx?NodeID=32&PersonID=6589
===============
WILLIAM D. CHASE v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT SERVICES
No. 01-AA-260
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS
804 A.2d 1119; 2002 D.C. App.
August 15, 2002, Decided
On Petition for Review of a Decision of the District of Columbia
Department of Employment Services
COUNSEL: Thomas J. Gagliardo, for petitioner
...Petitioner challenges the ruling of the Department of Employment
Services ("DOES") that the basis of his discharge was gross
misconduct. Because the Appeals Examiner failed to make sufficient
findings, we are constrained to remand the case for further
proceedings.
Thomas Gagliardo
8401 Colesville Rd.
Ste. 315
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Phone: (301) 589-1900
===============
BILLY ZHAO ZHEN ZHANG v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER
AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS
No. 00-AA-1489
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS
834 A.2d 97; 2003 D.C. App.
October 23, 2003, Decided
Petition for Review of a Decision of the District of Columbia
Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs. (OAD No. 1999-043).
COUNSEL: Tobias E. Zimmerman, with whom Michael L. Converse, was on
the brief for petitioner.
...Appellant Zhang appeals from a decision of the Board of
Registration for Professional Engineers denying his application for
licensure without examination. We hold that the Board failed to
consider relevant evidence of the petitioner's experience and
background and that, accordingly, its findings are not supported by
the record, and its conclusion that petitioner failed to establish
that he is a person of established and recognized standing as an
engineer is unreliable. Accordingly, we remand for further
proceedings.
Tobias Eli Zimmerman
Counsel
Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP
Robert S. Strauss Building, 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W.
Washington, District of Columbia 20036-1564
Telephone: 202-887-4410
Fax: 202-887-4288
http://www.akingump.com/attorney.cfm?attorney_id=1618
===============
Again, let me know if there is anything else I can do for you.
pafalafa-ga
search strategy -- searched legal databases for cases where DC
governmental agencies were successfully challenged, and also searched
for the contact information for the attornies involved in each case |
,
0 Comments
)