Legal Opinion
RUPSHA 2007, LLC v. Kellum
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided November 17, 2011No. 09-CV-1330PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BLACKBURNE-RIGSBY, Associate Judge:
This appeal arises because the District of Columbia (“District”) made an adminis trative error that resulted in a tax sale purchaser paying for a property that should not have been offered for sale. There is no dispute that the purchaser, appellant Rupsha 2007, LLC (“Rupsha”), should be reimbursed, rather we are asked to determine who should reimburse Rup-sha and the amount for which Rupsha is entitled to reimbursement. The amount for which Rupsha is entitled to be reimbursed is dictated by statute, 1 and depends on how the erroneous tax sale is retracted —…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- District of Columbia v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2008
- Thomas v. District of Columbia Department of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
- Malone v. RobinsonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1992
- District of Columbia v. Catholic University of AmericaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979
- School Street Associates Ltd. Partnership v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2001
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- VILEAN STEVENS & IKE PROPHET v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2016
- Aeon Financial, LLC v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2014
- Eldridge v. D.C. DHSDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2021