From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mazza v. House Craft, LLC

District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Jun 30, 2011
22 A.3d 820 (D.C. 2011)

Opinion

No. 09-CV-1068.

Filed June 30, 2011.

BEFORE: WASHINGTON, Chief Judge; BLACKBURNE-RIGSBY, Associate Judge; and KING, Senior Judge.

Prior report: D.C., 18 A.3d 786.


ORDER


On consideration of appellant's consent motion to vacate this court's opinion issued on April 28, 2011, as moot, and the motion of the Trial Lawyers Association of Metropolitan Washington, D.C. and Public Justice, P.C., for leave to file the lodged brief as amici curiae, and on further consideration of this court's order filed May 17, 2011, denying appellee's motion to dismiss the appeal as moot; and it appearing that this case was settled by the parties, it is

ORDERED that appellant's consent motion to vacate opinion is granted and this court's opinion issued on April 28, 2011, is hereby vacated as moot since this case was settled by the parties prior to the issuance of the court's April 28, 2011, opinion, and the mandate issued on May 20, 2011, is hereby recalled. It is

FURTHER ORDERED, sua sponte, that this court's orider of May 17, 2011, is hereby vacated. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that appellee's motion to dismiss the appeal is granted, and this appeal is hereby dismissed. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that the motion of the Trial Lawyers Association of Metropolitan Washington, D.C. and Public Justice, P.C., for leave to file the lodged brief as amid curiae is denied as moot. It is

FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall reissue the mandate forthwith.


Summaries of

Mazza v. House Craft, LLC

District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Jun 30, 2011
22 A.3d 820 (D.C. 2011)
Case details for

Mazza v. House Craft, LLC

Case Details

Full title:Anthony MAZZA, Appellant, v. HOUSE CRAFT, LLC, Appellee

Court:District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Date published: Jun 30, 2011

Citations

22 A.3d 820 (D.C. 2011)

Citing Cases

Potomac Development v. District of Columbia D.C

We adopted the plausibility standard in one case, but the opinion was vacated as moot because it turned out…

Pietrangelo v. Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr, LLP

“All that is required when we consider the sufficiency of the complaint is ‘a short and plain statement of…