Legal Opinion
Carow v. Bishop
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided December 12, 1946No. Nos. 436, 437, and 438PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HOOD, Associate Judge.
Appellants, as landlords, brought suits for possession of portions of a building occupied separately by the three appellees. The cases were consolidated for trial and at the close of plaintiffs’ evidence all defendants moved for findings in their favor and dismissal of the complaints. The motion was granted and appeals, consolidated here, were taken,
The property in question is a three-story building in a commercial zone. The first floor is occupied by a store and office. Appellee Hunter occupies the front of the second floor, using it for dwelling purposes and the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Freese v. Hibernia Savings & Loan SocietyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Brown v. SchmitzSupreme Court of Iowa · 1946
- Staves v. JohnsonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1945
- Lorino v. Crawford Packing Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1943
- E. E. Alley Co. v. BallSupreme Court of Florida · 1931
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Givens v. GoldsteinDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1947
- Gaddis v. HongellDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1955
- Keefer v. Keefer and Johnson, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1976
- Taylor v. United Broadcasting Co.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1948
- District of Columbia v. TilghmanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1960
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.