Opinions and Memorandum of Judgments (MOJs)

Last Updated : 02/11/2026

About Opinions and MOJs

Opinions

The court publishes opinions in cases to provide guidance to both the litigants and the trial court or agency, and the public. Published opinions may create new law, or interpret ambiguous statutes, clarify certain rules or concepts, or otherwise be of general interest. These decisions are published in print and on the DCCA website. They are binding precedent, which means they can be cited as supporting authority in other cases.

MOJs

The court issues Memorandum Opinion and Judgments (MOJs) in cases where the decision applies established legal principles. The decisions are issued by the panel (per curiam), not under the name of an individual judge. They are not published, and except as permitted by DC App. R. 28(g), they may not be cited as supporting authority in other cases. For that reason, the court only lists online the names and case numbers of MOJs that have been issued. If a party or other interested person believes that a specific MOJ should be published, the party or interested person may file a motion to publish no later than 30 days after the MOJ issues.

Show:
Radio options
Show:
Appeal Number Case Date Disposition Judge
97-CV-2016 Marmac Investment Company Inc. v. Richardson Beard. Sep 21, 2000
97-CV-2076 Breezevale Limited v. Timothy L. Dickinson. Sep 21, 2000
98-CF-119 "Terrence Ford v. United States (see 8/12/04 order/opinion denying rehearing) Sep 21, 2000
98-SP-594 In re: T. Carlton Richardson. Sep 21, 2000
99-CV-482, 99-CV-398 John D. Croley v. Republican National Committee. Sep 21, 2000
96-CF-1925, 98-CO-638 Frederick Douglas Kyle v. US Sep 14, 2000
97-AA-1845 Nellie R. Walden v. DC Department of Employment Services & Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. Sep 14, 2000
00-BG-917 In re: Lloyd D. Iglehart. Sep 14, 2000
98-CV-1223, 98-CV-1317 Marie Bembery v. DC Sep 14, 2000
99-CV-170 Watergate West, Inc. v. Barclays Bank, S.A. Sep 14, 2000