TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

George E. v. Stone v. Board of Examiners and Registrars of Architects of the District of Columbia

George E. v. STONE, Petitioner, v. BOARD OF EXAMINERS AND REGISTRARS OF ARCHITECTS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Respondent

George E. v. Stone v. Bd. of Examiners & Registrars of Architects of the Dist. of Columbia, 249 F.2d 104 (D.C. Cir. 1957)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
February 6, 1957
Docket
No. 13609
Judges
Bazelon, Fahy, Burger, Chambers
Citations
249 F.2d 104

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the petition for allowance of an appeal from the judgment of the Municipal Court of Appeals entered herein October 23, 1956, of petitioner’s brief, of respondent’s brief, of petitioner’s reply, and of the decision and order of the Board of Examiners and Registrars of Architects entered herein June 21, 1956, contained in the transcript of record; and it appearing that, although the Board’s sole conclusion was that petitioner “did violate Section 27(a) of the Architect’s Registration Act” (§ 2-1027(a), D.C.Code, 1951 ed.), which permits revocation of a certificate of registration “in case it is shown that the certificate was obtained through fraud or misrepresentation,” the Board nevertheless failed to find that the instant certificate was so obtained; it is Ordered by the Court that an appeal from said judgment of the Municipal Court of Appeals be, and it is hereby, allowed.

It is further ordered by the Court that the judgment and order of the Municipal Court of Appeals entered herein October 23, 1956, be, and it is hereby, vacated and that this case be, and it is hereby, remanded to the Municipal Court of Appeals with directions to remand this case to said Board with directions to vacate its decision and order of June 21,1956, herein, and to dismiss these proceedings unless it can and does find, from the evidence of record, that the actual obtaining of the instant certificate was due to fraud or misrepresentation.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1959: 11968: 119592026peak 1959 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Norman Fields v. District of Columbia404 F.2d 1323 (D.C. Cir. 1968)
  2. Eiland v. Ahearn153 A.2d 312 (D.C. 1959)

Most recent

  1. Norman Fields v. District of Columbia404 F.2d 1323 (D.C. Cir. 1968)
  2. Eiland v. Ahearn153 A.2d 312 (D.C. 1959)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list