Legal Opinion

Cooley v. Suitland Parkway Overlook Tenants' Ass'n

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided April 28, 1983No. 82-296PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

TERRY, Associate Judge:

In this case we must decide whether a landlord who seeks to evict a tenant for violation of an obligation under the tenancy must give the tenant a notice to quit under D.C.Code § 45-1406 (1981), in addition to a notice to cure or vacate under D.C.Code § 45 — 1561(b) (1981). We hold that in light of a recent change in the law embodied in section 45-1561(b), no additional notice to quit under section 45-1406 is required.

On October 30, 1981, appellant was personally served with a “Notice to Correct Violations of Obligations of Tenancy or Vacate.” The notice declared that…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. United States v. ClarkSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Mulky v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982
  3. United States v. BrownDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1980
  4. Jones v. Brawner Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1981

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Scarborough v. Winn Residential L.L.P.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2006
  2. Cormier v. McRaeDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
  3. Graham v. BernsteinDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1987
  4. Grubb v. WM. CALOMIRIS INVESTMENT CORPORATIONDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1991
  5. Luskey v. BORGER MANAGEMENT INC.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2007

2 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