Legal Opinion
Truitt v. Evangel Temple, Inc.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided December 11, 1984No. 84-275PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ROGERS, Associate Judge.
On appeal appellants-landlords contend the trial court erred in holding that they were not entitled to recover $14,000 for rent which accrued during an eight-month period in which the property was vacant as a result of appellee’s alleged wrongful abandonment. Appellants argue that a landlord’s termination of a lease does not terminate a tenant’s liability for past due rent. The trial court found that the rent received by appellants from a substitute tenant exceeded the rent called for in the original lease and, therefore, appellants have suffered no damages. We affirm.
I
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Wanderer v. Plainfield Carton Corp.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1976
- Friedman v. Thomas J. Fisher & Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1952
- Lee v. FooteDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1984
- Fateh v. RichDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1984
- Ostrow v. SmulkinDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1969
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Hart v. Vermont Investment Ltd. PartnershipDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1995
- N.J. Industrial Properties, Inc. v. Y.C. & V.L., Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1985
- Bachman v. Easy Parking of America, Inc.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1997
- La Casa Nino, Inc. v. Plaza EstebanSupreme Court of Colorado · 1988
- International Commission on English in the Liturgy v. SchwartzDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.