Legal Opinion
Mahdi v. Poretsky Management, Inc.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided July 20, 1981No. 79-1011PublishedCited by 30 opinions
1Per curiam
On this appeal from a judgment of possession granted to landlord Poretsky Management, Inc., appellant argues that his Fifth Amendment rights have been violated. He concedes that possession was granted for his failure to comply with an order for protective payments, but argues that because the inability to comply was due to his indigency, the trial court unconstitutionally deprived him of due process by disposing of the claim on the merits without a hearing on the merits.
While this appeal has been pending in this court, the trial court in the case of Arthur E. Morrisette Real Estate v. Hunt,…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- National Hockey League v. Metropolitan Hockey Club, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Societe Internationale Pour Participations Industrielles Et Commerciales, S. A. v. RogersSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Lindsey v. NormetSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Hovey v. ElliottSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Hammond Packing Co. v. ArkansasSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- Habib v. ThurstonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1986
- Ljc Corporation v. John J. BoyleCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1985
- McQueen v. Lustine Realty Co., Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
- Battle v. NashDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1983
- Mullin v. N Street Follies Ltd. PartnershipDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1998
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.