civil-litigation federal-courts

D.C. Court Issues USCA Mandate in Montgomery v. WMATA

23-cv-00463 D.D.C.
Active Active litigation Sign in to follow this case
Share mail
Advertisement
description

Case Summary

The District of Columbia court issued a United States Court of Appeals mandate in Montgomery v. WMATA, docket number 23-cv-00463. The mandate signifies the conclusion of appellate review and directs further proceedings consistent with the appellate decision.

No timeline activity recorded yet. This page will grow as rulings and filings land.

Key Issues

  • • USCA mandate
  • • Appellate decision
  • • WMATA liability
smart_toy Juryvine case summary generated from primary court records. How we verify our work.
fact_check

Docket Snapshot

account_balance

Court

D.D.C.

District of Columbia · D.C. Circuit · DC

tag

Docket

Not captured

Appellate

timeline

Stage

Active litigation

Active

event

Filed

Date unavailable

Not in the available feed

new_releases

Latest Filing

1:23-cv-00463 MONTGOMERY v. WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY

Other · May 08, 2026

newspaper

Coverage

1 article

1 source tracked

groups

Participants

1 Defendant, 1 Plaintiff

2 linked entities

gavel

Judge

Not assigned in feed

What the record shows

This case is tied to District of Columbia, a federal district court in DC.

The newest docket activity we have is a other dated May 08, 2026.

The visible party/entity graph currently includes WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY, 1:23-cv-00463 MONTGOMERY.

Press monitoring has found 1 related article from 1 distinct source.

About This Court

District of Columbia (D.D.C.) is a federal district court in the D.C. Circuit, DC.

Advertisement

Case Timeline

1 event
info
Other May 8, 2026

1:23-cv-00463 MONTGOMERY v. WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY

The US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit issued a mandate in the case of Montgomery v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, affirming the lower court's decision. This mandate brings the case to a close, with the appeals court upholding the original ruling. The case involved a dispute over the transit authority's policies.

description View filing open_in_new
Advertisement
newspaper

Press Coverage

1 article
settings_backup_restore Data provenance expand_more

Sources tracked

1 outlet · 1 article

Timeline events

1 record on file

Last updated

5 hours, 34 minutes ago

Juryvine aggregates docket entries from PACER/CourtListener, press coverage, and GDELT signals. Ingestion timestamps do not appear in the What Changed feed — that reflects real court activity only.