Legal Opinion

Shay v. Randall H. Hagner & Co.

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided November 4, 1943No. 119PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CAYTON, Associate Judge.

Defendants appeal from a judgment entered against them for possession of an apartment in a downtown apartment building.

Their lease prohibited keeping a dog in the apartment. It also provided that “no waiver of any breach of any covenant herein shall be construed to be a waiver of the covenant itself or of any subsequent breach thereof or of this agreement.”

When defendants first took possession they had no dog in the apartment. Four or five months later they brought one in. The resident manager told Mrs. Shay that because this was the first dog in a court apartment…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Merritt v. KayDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1924
  2. Mee v. Marlyn Apartment Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1942

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Stewart v. Shannon & Luchs Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1946
  2. Weaver Bros., Inc. v. NewlinDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1950
  3. Shay v. Randall H. Hagner & Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1944

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

Powered by the Exa API