Mayor claim (District of Columbia) · Go Syfert
← District of Columbia issues

Mayor claim in District of Columbia

6 District of Columbia opinions name it 1 courts 2004–2025 1 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by District of Columbia courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
Providence Hospital v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Servicesgreen
dc · 2004 · cited in 2 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019
2 sentences

2019In the first situation, a claimant is entitled to recover attorney's fees "if the employer refuses to pay any compensation for a work-related injury within thirty days of receiving written notice from the Mayor of a claim for compensation, and the claimant consequently uses the services of an attorney to prosecute successfully his or her claim." Id. (emphasis added) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted); see also D.C.

2019In the second situation, recovery of attorney's fees is permitted "if an employer voluntarily pays or tenders compensation without an award but later refuses to pay the additional compensation claimed by the claimant within fourteen days of receiving a recommendation by the Mayor that the claim is justified, and the claimant uses the services of an attorney to recover the full amount claimed." Providence Hosp. , 855 A.2d at 1112 (emphasis added) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted); see also D.C.

22
New York Legal Assistance Group v. Board of Immigration Appealsgreen
ca2 · 2021 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025
1 sentence

2025Of course, courts fashioning relief must “take into account the potentially significant burden on the agency of complying with any such order, and work with the parties to establish realistic timelines for compliance.” NYLAG, 987 F.3d at 225.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in District of Columbia. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (3)

CaseCitedYears
York Apartments Tenants Ass'n v. District of Columbia Zoning Commission green
dc · 2004
1 sentence

2019Id. 9 Specifically, petitioner points out that the record contains no written report from the Department of Housing and Community Development ("DHCD") confronting impacts such as displacement; no written report from the Department of Energy and the Environment ("DOEE") showing how the location of the PUD's loading dock "will not bring additional noise, refuse, odors, emissions, and other environmental impacts"; no written reports from police and fire department officials about whether they have the capacity to handle the emergency needs for "another 200 units" without an adverse impact on emer

12019–2019
Galen Medical Associates, Inc. v. United States, and Deborah Downing Md, Pllc green
cafc · 2004
1 sentence

2010Assocs., Inc., supra, 369 F.3d at 1330 ; Organization for Envtl.

12010–2010
C & P Telephone Co. v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services green
dc · 1994
1 sentence

2004Co., 638 A.2d at 693 .

12004–2004

Statutes the citing opinions construe

DC § D.C. Code § 32-1530 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

DC 6 (2004–2025) OH 5 (1896–2004) NY 4 (1960–2019) PA 2 (1989–2003) MI 2 (2011–2021)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check