Legal Opinion

Henson v. Prue

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided November 27, 2002No. 99-CV-520PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SCHWELB, Associate Judge:

Following a bench trial, the trial court ruled that the defendant, Clarence Prue, had wrongfully evicted Gregory Henson by changing the locks to a house at which Henson had rented a room. Declaring that she did not believe Henson’s testimony, however, the trial judge assessed Prue’s damages at zero. Henson appeals; we conclude that, in light of the trial judge’s findings, the judge could permissibly hold that Henson was entitled only to nominal damages. Because a remand for the award of nominal damages would serve no useful purpose, we affirm.

I

According to his…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Robinson v. SariskyDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
  2. United Insurance Co. of America v. MurphySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1998
  3. Reese v. HaywoodSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1962
  4. Kraisinger v. LiggettCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1979
  5. Harkins v. Win Corp.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2001

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Wood v. NeumanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2009
  2. Hinton v. Sealander Brokerage Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2007
  3. Zoerb v. Barton Protective ServicesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2004
  4. D.G. II, LLC v. NixCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2011
  5. Mario Segreti v. Luke DeIuliisDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2018

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