District of Columbia Court of Appeals
The District of Columbia Court of Appeals is the court of last resort in Washington, D.C. The Court is the highest court in the District of Columbia and was established by Congress in 1970. The court is comprised of a chief judge and eight associate judges. In addition, retired judges serve the court who have been approved as Senior judges.
The D.C. Court of Appeals is the equivalent of a state supreme court. As the court of last resort for the District of Columbia, the Court of Appeals reviews all final orders, judgments and specified interlocutory orders of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. The Court also has jurisdiction to review decisions of administrative agencies, boards, and commissions of the District of Columbia, as well as to answer questions of law certified by federal and state appellate courts. The Court reviews proposed rules of the District's Superior Court and its own rules.
Cases before the court are heard by randomly selected, three-judge panels, unless a hearing before the court sitting en banc is requested and ordered. A hearing or rehearing before the Court en banc may be ordered by a majority of the judges in regular active service, generally only when consideration by the full court is necessary to maintain uniformity of its decisions, or when the case involves a question of exceptional importance.
In the exercise of its jurisdiction over members of the legal profession, the Court created the District of Columbia Bar and possesses the power to approve the rules regarding attorney discipline. The Court approves rules regarding attorney conduct and has established rules governing the admission of members of the District of Columbia Bar and the resolution of complaints concerning the unauthorized practice of law in the District of Columbia
- Chief Judge Eric Washington
- Corinne Ann Beckwith
- Anna Blackburne-Rigsby
- Catherine Easterly
- John R. Fisher
- Stephen Glickman
- Roy W. McLeese
- Phyllis Thompson
- James Belson
- Michael Farrell
- John Ferren
- Warren King
- Frank Nebeker
- Theodore Newman
- William C. Pryor
- Inez Smith Reid
- Vanessa Ruiz
- John Steadman
- John Terry
In December 2013, the Center for Public Integrity released a study on disclosure requirements for state supreme court judges. Analysts from the Center reviewed the rules governing financial disclosure in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia, as well as personal financial disclosures for the past three years. The study found that 42 states and Washington D.C. received failing grades. Washington D.C. earned a grade of F in the study. No state received a grade higher than "C". Furthermore, due in part to these lax disclosure standards, the study found 35 instances of questionable gifts, investments overlapping with caseloads and similar potential ethical quandaries. The study also noted 14 cases in which justices participated although they or their spouses held stock in the company involved in the litigation.
- News: Number of complaints and applicants to DC courts on the rise, February 26, 2012
- District of Columbia Judicial Nomination Commission Record of Recommendations and Chief Judge Designations and Presidential Appointments to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals and the Superior Court of the District of Columbia May 8, 1975 to September 30, 2011
- Website of the D.C. Court of Appeals
- District of Columbia Courts, "2013 Annual Report - Statistical Summary"
- District of Columbia Courts, "2012 Annual Report - Statistical Summary" Scroll to page 5
- District of Columbia Courts, "2007 Annual Report - Statistical Summary" Scroll to page 8
- Center for Public Integrity, "State supreme court judges reveal scant financial information," December 5, 2013
William C. Pryor • Michael Farrell • John Terry • John Steadman • Frank Nebeker • John Ferren • Warren King • James Belson • Theodore Newman • Phyllis Thompson • Anna Blackburne-Rigsby • Stephen Glickman • Vanessa Ruiz • Corinne Ann Beckwith • Catharine Easterly • John R. Fisher • Roy W. McLeese •