Legal Opinion · Dissent

Tippett v. Daly

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided December 30, 2010No. 06-CV-1327Published

1DissentRuiz, Associate Judge

I cannot agree with the court’s conclusion that in order to protect a tenant’s right to purchase under the District of Columbia Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (“TOPA”), a tenant’s expression of interest in purchasing the property must be received by the owner within the thirty-day period prescribed in the statute, rather than sent by the tenant during that time. The inevitable result of the majority’s conclusion is that a tenant who elects to mail the expression of interest by first-class mail — as is permitted — will necessarily have less than the full thirty days allowed by the statute,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Bell v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1955
  2. Callanan v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  3. Janes v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1998
  4. Barnhardt v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2010
  5. Montgomery County Motor Co. v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1925

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API