Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ________________________________________________________________ page 319 I. THE NEW LAW SET FORTH BY THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA IN PALMER V. SHULTZ MAY NOT BE APPLIED RETROACTIVELY IN THIS CASE _______________________________________________________________________ 319 II. THE OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORIES AT ISSUE...
Let's get started
![]()
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
HARTMAN v. WICK
678 F.Supp. 312 (1988)
Carolee Brady HARTMAN, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Charles Z. WICK, Defendant.
United States District Court, District of Columbia.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
January 19, 1988.
As Amended January 29 and February 16, 1988.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Robert E.L. Eaton, Jr. and Stuart H. Newberger, Asst. U.S. Attys., Lorie J. Nierenberg and Richard H. Swan, Office of the Gen. Counsel, U.S. Information Agency (of counsel), on brief, Joseph E. DiGenova, U.S. Atty. and Royce C. Lamberth, Asst. U.S. Atty., for defendant.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.