Legal Opinion
Lustine v. Williams
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided October 20, 1949No. 855PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CLAGETT, Associate Judge.
The principal question on this appeal concerns the applicability of the statute of limitations to an amended complaint by which additional defendants were brought into the case.
Appellee, as plaintiff below, sued appellant Lustine on June 19, 1946, claiming double an overcharge in rent of $7.50 per month for the period from April 22, 1941, to February 22, 1946.1 A motion to dismiss was denied. Continuances were had until August 7, 1946, when the case was sent to the files to permit the parties to negotiate a settlement of the claim. Plaintiff’s subsequent motion for…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Delsnider v. GouldCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1946
- Cockrell v. First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'nDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1943
- Heitmuller v. BerkowCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1948
- Shenk v. CohenDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1947
- Goodacre v. ShulmierCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1934
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Savings Finance Corporation v. BlairMissouri Court of Appeals · 1955
- Hagans v. HagansDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1966
- McCulloch v. District of Columbia Rental Accommodations CommissionDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982
- Strand v. FrenkelDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1985
- Kennedy v. District of Columbia Rental Housing CommissionDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1998
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.