ROSANNE L. WOODROOF, APPELLANT, v. JOSEPH F. CUNNINGHAM, et al., APPELLEES;ROSANNE L. WOODROOF, APPELLANT, v. CUNNINGHAM & ASSOCIATES, PLC, APPELLEE;CUNNINGHAM & ASSOCIATES, PLC, APPELLANT, v. ROSANNE L. WOODROOF, APPELLEE., 147 A.3d 777

Summary

HOLDINGS: [1]-The appellate court had jurisdiction under D.C. Code § 16-4427(a)(1) (2012 Repl.) to hear a former law client's appeal from the trial court's order staying her legal malpractice proceedings and compelling arbitration, based on the terms of a retainer agreement and arbitration agreement (AA) that the parties signed pursuant to D.C. Code § 16-4406(b) and the fact that the AA was not ambiguous nor an unenforceable consumer adhesion contract, and that it was not selectively invoked to the attorney's advantage; [2]-Moreover, the District of Columbia Council did not violate the Home Rule Act under D.C. Code § 11-721(a) (2012) by allowing appellate review pursuant § 16-4427(a)(1) because D.C. Code § 1-206.02(a)(4) (2012) and the concept of finality were not construed in a rigid manner, such that the Council could make substantive changes to the law.