Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Multi-Family Management, Inc. v. Hancock

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Decided August 31, 1995No. 93-CV-346, 93-CV-383Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partFerren, Associate Judge

This case began when the landlord, MultiFamily Management Inc., sued the tenant, Robert Hancock, for possession of Hancock’s apartment based on failure to pay rent. The trial court entered a protective order requiring Hancock to pay his rent into the court registry each month “during the pendency of this case.” Hancock filed an answer and counterclaim, alleging housing code violations in the apartment and in common areas of the building. The trial judge found there were code violations and accordingly ordered rent abatements. Pursuant to a Housing Assistance Payments (HAP) contract1 between…

2Cases cited45 opinions

  1. Provident Tradesmens Bank & Trust Co. v. PattersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  2. Aldinger v. HowardSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. Porter v. Warner Holding Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
  4. Henningsen v. Bloomfield Motors, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1960
  5. Dorothy P. Robinson v. Lorillard Corporation (Two Cases)Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1971

40 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