Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)

Citation
Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
Parent Document
Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
Jurisdiction
DC (municipal)
Effective Date
2013-07-25

Other Sections in This Document (33)

Full Text

632 chars
Foote Properties asserts, however, that section 304.4 has no application either to suits for non-payment of rent after a tenancy has ended or to lease provisions where payment of attorneys’ fees are conditional. Its arguments do not persuade. Nothing in section 304.4 limits its protection to individuals in ongoing tenancies. Rather, the regulation bars landlords from placing any fee-shifting provisions in a lease in the first instance — that is, when the parties have a landlord and tenant relationship. Likewise, section 304.4 contains no exceptions for conditional fee-shifting provisions.5 It bars any fee-shifting provision.