Shephard v. U.S. Dist. Court for the Dist. of Columbia

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding appellant was not required to cross-appeal or to obtain certificate of appealability to reargue grounds the district court rejected because the theory was part of the record and did not propose to expand his rights under the judgment
• holding appellant was not required to cross‐appeal or to obtain certificate of appealability to reargue grounds the district court rejected because the theory was part of the rec‐ ord and did not propose to expand his rights under the judg‐ ment
• holding appellant was not required to cross‐appeal or to obtain certificate of appealability to reargue grounds the district court rejected because the theory was part of the rec‐ ord and did not propose to expand his rights under the judg‐ ment

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).