From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Neighborhood Legal Services Program v. Ryan

District of Columbia Court of Appeals
May 5, 1971
276 A.2d 728 (D.C. 1971)

Opinion

No. 5500.

Argued November 9, 1970.

Decided May 5, 1971.

Frank D. Reeves, Washington, D.C., for petitioners.

David P. Sutton, Asst. Corp. Counsel, with whom Richard W. Barton, Asst. Corp. Counsel, was on the brief, for respondent. C. Francis Murphy, Acting Corp. Counsel, also entered an appearance for respondent.

Allan Ashman and John M. Joyce, Washington, D.C., counsel for National Legal Aid and Defender Assn., filed a brief as amicus curiae.

Sherman L. Cohn, Washington, D.C., also entered an appearance for National Legal Aid and Defender Assn. and filed an amicus curiae brief as counsel for the Federal Bar Association's National Committee on Legal Assistance to the Poor.

Terry F. Lenzner, Jason I. Newman and Benjamin Stein, counsel for the Office of Economic Opportunity, filed a brief as amicus curiae.

Before KERN, GALLAGHER and NEBEKER, Associate Judges.


The trial court sitting in the Domestic Relations Branch of the District of Columbia Court of General Sessions assigned certain attorneys employed by the Neighborhood Legal Services Program (NLSP) to represent defendant in proceedings initiated by indigent plaintiffs also represented by NLSP attorneys. Petitioners seek from us a writ of mandamus or prohibition against the court directing the cessation of such appointments because NLSP attorneys would thereby be forced to violate the Code of Professional Responsibility and could not under these circumstances be "disinterested" attorneys as our Code requires.

Now the Superior Court of the District of Columbia.

D.C. Code 1967, § 16-918.

The writs which petitioners seek are extraordinary and should not be lightly issued unless normal review procedures are unavailable. Morrow v. District of Columbia, 135 U.S.App.D.C. 160, 168, 417 F.2d 728, 736 (1969); United States v. Kronheim, D.C.Mun.App., 80 A.2d 280, 282 (1951). In view of our holding in Borden v. Borden, D.C.App., 277 A.2d 89, we are confident that the issue of appointment of NLSP attorneys will be resolved and we therefore deny the relief requested in this case. See Brown v. Fauntleroy, D.C. Cir., 442 F.2d 838 at 842 (Decided Feb. 26, 1971).

So ordered.


Summaries of

Neighborhood Legal Services Program v. Ryan

District of Columbia Court of Appeals
May 5, 1971
276 A.2d 728 (D.C. 1971)
Case details for

Neighborhood Legal Services Program v. Ryan

Case Details

Full title:NEIGHBORHOOD LEGAL SERVICES PROGRAM of the District of Columbia, et al.…

Court:District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Date published: May 5, 1971

Citations

276 A.2d 728 (D.C. 1971)

Citing Cases

Borden v. Borden

Corporation Counsel concedes this but takes the position that: In re Rabin, D.C.App., 276 A.2d 729 and…

Yeager v. Greene

We have recognized the writ of mandamus as an extraordinary remedy which may not be implemented as a…