Section 15-703

Citation: Section 15-703
Parent Document: Landise v. Mauro, 927 A.2d 1026 (2007)
Jurisdiction: DC (municipal)
Effective Date: 2007-05-31
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/5143156/landise-v-mauro/ ↗

Full Text

788 chars

(Emphasis added.) Therefore, we conclude that the trial court’s ruling in this case is the type of discretionary ruling that does not warrant immediate review. See Klein v. Adams & Peck, 436 F.2d 387, 339 (2d Cir.1971) (“Although orders denying applications for the posting of security are appealable when the issue is the power of the court to give the requested relief, ... where the issue concerns the abuse of the court’s discretion in ruling upon the question of posting security, the likelihood of reversal is too negligible to justify the delay and expense incident to an appeal and the consequent burden on hard pressed appellate courts.”) (internal citation and quotation marks omitted). It was an exercise of discretion designed to keep the case progressing to a final judgment.

Other Sections in This Document (27)

Full Text