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)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
- Pajic v. Foote Properties, LLC, 72 A.3d 140 (2013)
Full Text
803 chars. In addition, we note that facts asserted by Mr. Pajic which were undisputed or even conceded by Foote Properties were not accounted for in the court's summary judgment ruling and accompanying judgment. Thus, the court's determination that Mr. Pajic owed $8,200 to Foote Properties does not seem to account for the $1,450 last month's rent payment that Foote Properties did not dispute Mr. Pajic made when the lease was executed. (Foote Properties conceded on appeal that Mr. Pajic should have been given credit for this $1,450 payment but was not.) And, although Foote Properties conceded in its Motion for Summary Judgment that its $8,200 claim should have been reduced by the $500 security deposit, the trial court did not reduce its award of unpaid rent by that amount when it entered the judgment.