Twyman v. Johnson, 655 A.2d 850 (1995)

Citation: Twyman v. Johnson, 655 A.2d 850 (1995)
Parent Document: Twyman v. Johnson, 655 A.2d 850 (1995)
Jurisdiction: DC (municipal)
Effective Date: 1995-03-13
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1512354/twyman-v-johnson/ ↗

Full Text

731 chars

Johnson does not challenge the jury’s finding of what amounted to a partial breach of the implied warranty of habitability. (Nor does she challenge the later award of attorney’s fees to Twyman under the Act.) She does contend, however, that (a) the trial judge erroneously permitted Twyman to assert as an affirmative defense to Johnson’s suit for possession the alleged retaliatory nature of the lawsuit; and (b) the judge erroneously allowed Twyman to assert an independent cause of action (both in her amended civil complaint and in her counterclaim to the possessory action) for retaliation based upon D.C.Code § 45-2552 (1990) (“Retaliatory Action”) — a claim on which the jury awarded Twyman $10,000 in separate damages. *855

Other Sections in This Document (110)

Full Text