express statutory standard (District of Columbia) · Go Syfert
← District of Columbia issues

express statutory standard in District of Columbia

5 District of Columbia opinions name it 1 courts 1989–2015 0 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 (3)

CaseFollowedCited
Federal Communications Commission v. Fox Television Stations, Inc.green
scotus · 2009 · cited in 3 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 2012–2014
2 sentences

2014See Mack v. United States, 6 A.3d 1224, 1233-34 (D.C. 2010) (“[T]he canon of constitutional avoidance ‘is an interpretive tool, counseling that ambiguous statutory language be construed to avoid serious constitutional doubts.’” (quoting FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 556 U.S. 502, 516 (2009)); accord Edward J.

2014See Mack v. United States, 6 A.3d 1224, 1233-34 (D.C. 2010) (“[T]he canon of constitutional avoidance „is an interpretive tool, counseling that ambiguous statutory language be construed to avoid serious constitutional doubts.‟” (quoting FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 556 U.S. 502, 516 (2009)); accord Edward J.

33
Mack v. United Statesgreen
dc · 2010 · cited in 3 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 2012–2014
2 sentences

2014See Mack v. United States, 6 A.3d 1224, 1233-34 (D.C. 2010) (“[T]he canon of constitutional avoidance ‘is an interpretive tool, counseling that ambiguous statutory language be construed to avoid serious constitutional doubts.’” (quoting FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 556 U.S. 502, 516 (2009)); accord Edward J.

2014See Mack v. United States, 6 A.3d 1224, 1233-34 (D.C. 2010) (“[T]he canon of constitutional avoidance „is an interpretive tool, counseling that ambiguous statutory language be construed to avoid serious constitutional doubts.‟” (quoting FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 556 U.S. 502, 516 (2009)); accord Edward J.

33
Library of Congress v. Shawred
scotus · 1986 · cited in 1 District of Columbia opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015
2 sentences

2015See 478 U.S. at 314-15 , 106 S.Ct. 2957 .

2015See 478 U.S. at 314-15 , 106 S.Ct. 2957 .

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 (1)

CaseCitedYears
Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness Society red
scotus · 1975
2 sentences

1989Mr. Tydings took a timely appeal from the court's December 2, 1987 order awarding attorney's fees and related expenses. [2] See, e.g., Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness Society, 421 U.S. 240 , 95 S.Ct. 1612 , 44 L.Ed.2d 141 (1975). [3] Our decisions construing § 16-911(a)(1) as permitting consideration of the respective financial abilities of the parties are paralleled in Maryland by an express statutory requirement that the court consider "the financial status of each party" before awarding suit money and counsel fees.

1989Mr. Tydings took a timely appeal from the court's December 2, 1987 order awarding attorney's fees and related expenses. [2] See, e.g., Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness Society, 421 U.S. 240 , 95 S.Ct. 1612 , 44 L.Ed.2d 141 (1975). [3] Our decisions construing § 16-911(a)(1) as permitting consideration of the respective financial abilities of the parties are paralleled in Maryland by an express statutory requirement that the court consider "the financial status of each party" before awarding suit money and counsel fees.

11989–1989

Statutes the citing opinions construe

DC § D.C. Code § 16-2310 (3) DC § D.C. Code § 16-2312 (3) DC § D.C. Code § 16-2320 (3) DC § D.C. Code § 16-2353 (3) DC § D.C. Code § 16-914 (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

CA 101 (1892–2025) TX 20 (1903–2025) NY 17 (1910–2016) IL 13 (1970–2021) OH 10 (1951–2024) OR 9 (1981–2025) PA 8 (1954–2021) GA 8 (1972–2022) SD 8 (1984–2013) LA 8 (1981–2018) KS 7 (1900–2015) CO 7 (1919–2008) MO 6 (1987–2022) DC 5 (1989–2015) HI 5 (1960–1976) CT 5 (1993–2017) MT 5 (1927–2020) WA 4 (1955–1998) UT 3 (2004–2024) NC 3 (1950–2010) IN 3 (1927–2016) OK 3 (1950–1992) MA 3 (1951–2011) WV 3 (1990–2005) MN 3 (1961–2013) NH 2 (2010–2020) VT 2 (2003–2009) TN 2 (1943–2005) VA 2 (2000–2001) MD 2 (1962–2007) AK 2 (1982–1994) MI 2 (1975–1999) FL 2 (1991–2024) WI 2 (1932–2005) AZ 2 (1982–1984)

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