George C. Papageorge v. Boyle Stuckey, et al.

Summary

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for Boyle and Afomia Stuckey and Eastern Savings Bank in a dispute concerning rights under the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA). The court held that TOPA was never triggered while Matt Banks was a tenant, so Banks never possessed vested TOPA rights that could be assigned to George Papageorge. The court therefore did not reach the trial court's alternative grounds of judicial estoppel and lack of notice.

Holdings

1. TOPA was never triggered while Banks was a tenant because Eastern Savings Bank had not made an offer of sale, sold or relinquished possession of the property, or entered into a third-party contract to sell it.
2. Because Banks never possessed vested TOPA rights, his purported assignment could not confer vested or enforceable TOPA rights on Papageorge.
3. The Court of Appeals could affirm summary judgment on the ground that TOPA was never triggered because the parties litigated that issue below and on appeal and no material factual dispute existed.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Court of Appeals could affirm summary judgment on the ground that TOPA had never been triggered, even though the trial court relied on different grounds.
2. Whether Matt Banks possessed vested TOPA rights that he could assign to Papageorge before Eastern Savings Bank made an offer of sale or entered into a third-party contract.
3. Whether an owner's intent to sell, a brokerage listing agreement, or a vacant-building form triggers TOPA rights before the owner has made an offer of sale or entered into a third-party contract.

Disposition

affirmed