Summary
The District of Columbia Court of Appeals affirmed dismissal of a landlord's action seeking nonredeemable possession based on the tenant's repeated nonpayment of rent. The court held that, notwithstanding a lease provision waiving notice to quit, the landlord was required to serve a statutory notice to correct the alleged tenancy violation before filing suit.
Holdings
- A waiver of notice to quit does not waive the separate statutory requirement that a housing provider serve the tenant with a notice to correct the violation or vacate before recovering possession based on a violation of an obligation of tenancy.
- The trial court properly dismissed the landlord's action because the landlord did not serve the notice to cure required by statute.
Questions Presented
- Whether the tenant's contractual waiver of notice to quit also waived the statutory requirement that the landlord serve a notice to correct the violation or vacate before seeking possession based on a violation of an obligation of tenancy.
- Whether dismissal was proper when the landlord failed to serve the required notice to cure.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (3)
- Kaiser v. Rapley, 380 A.2d 995 (D.C. 1977)(followed)
- Suggs v. Lakritz Adler Mgmt., L.L.C., 933 A.2d 795 (D.C. 2007)(followed)
- Borger Mgmt., Inc. v. Nelson-Lee, 959 A.2d 694 (D.C. 2008)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…