From Jon Pels, the founder of Pels Law: “I know there is a lot of talk in the news today about a certain “per curiam“ opinion, which is an opinion delivered by an entire court rather than a single judge. We also obtained today such an opinion, in a business dispute matter.

As I tell my clients, sometimes trial judges get it wrong. They try to do the right thing, but they have busy dockets and a lot of pressure, just like anybody else in this industry. Our recourse is to appeal and the system usually works.

It is nice to get victories on behalf of our clients, if we are forced to appeal, and I think the unanimous court in this case got it right.

A special congratulations to attorneys, Stanley Doerrer, Alvaro Llosa, Maria Olsen, Nancy Pollack and Katerina Newell from our firm, who helped to prosecute this case and the appeal.”

v. ESTATE OF ELIMEAY WOODLAND et al., APPELLEES. The District of Columbia Court of Appeals issued the following Memorandum Opinion and Judgment Per Curiam:

“Appellant Anastase A. Ioanndis argues that the trial court erred when it granted summary judgment to appellees and denied Mr. Ioanndis damages for money he lent to now-deceased Elimeay Woodlan. We agree with Mr. Loanndis that the trial court erred in its application of the D.C. statute of frauds and the presumption about gifts.”