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/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (27)
- Landise v. Mauro, 927 A.2d 1026 (2007)
- Landise v. Mauro, 927 A.2d 1026 (2007)
- Landise v. Mauro, 927 A.2d 1026 (2007)
- Landise v. Mauro, 927 A.2d 1026 (2007)
- Landise v. Mauro, 927 A.2d 1026 (2007)
- Landise v. Mauro, 927 A.2d 1026 (2007)
- Landise v. Mauro, 927 A.2d 1026 (2007)
- Landise v. Mauro, 927 A.2d 1026 (2007)
- Landise v. Mauro, 927 A.2d 1026 (2007)
- Landise v. Mauro, 927 A.2d 1026 (2007)
- Landise v. Mauro, 927 A.2d 1026 (2007)
- Landise v. Mauro, 927 A.2d 1026 (2007)
- Landise v. Mauro, 927 A.2d 1026 (2007)
- Landise v. Mauro, 927 A.2d 1026 (2007)
- Section 15-703
- Section 15-703
- Section 15-703
- Section 15-703
- Section 15-703
- Section 15-703
- Section 15-703
- Section 15-703
- Section 15-703
- Section 15-703
- Section 15-703
- Section 15-703
- Section 15-703
Full Text
632 chars. In addition, Landise argues that the trial court erred in denying Landise's motion requesting entry of final judgment and that D.C.Code § 15-703 is unconstitutional as applied to her. We do not consider those arguments. In an order issued December 15, 2005, we ruled that any appeal from the order denying Landise’s motion for entry of final judgment "is both untimely and improperly filed since that order is not final and appeal-able.” Furthermore, the constitutional argument would require an assessment of the merits of the case, which, as we discuss, infra, we do not have jurisdiction to consider. . Subsection (a) provides: