McKenzie v. McCulloch, 634 A.2d 430 (1993)
- Citation
- McKenzie v. McCulloch, 634 A.2d 430 (1993)
- Parent Document
- McKenzie v. McCulloch, 634 A.2d 430 (1993)
- Jurisdiction
- DC (municipal)
- Effective Date
- 1993-12-02
Other Sections in This Document (19)
- McKenzie v. McCulloch, 634 A.2d 430 (1993)
- McKenzie v. McCulloch, 634 A.2d 430 (1993)
- McKenzie v. McCulloch, 634 A.2d 430 (1993)
- McKenzie v. McCulloch, 634 A.2d 430 (1993)
- McKenzie v. McCulloch, 634 A.2d 430 (1993)
- McKenzie v. McCulloch, 634 A.2d 430 (1993)
- McKenzie v. McCulloch, 634 A.2d 430 (1993)
- McKenzie v. McCulloch, 634 A.2d 430 (1993)
- McKenzie v. McCulloch, 634 A.2d 430 (1993)
- McKenzie v. McCulloch, 634 A.2d 430 (1993)
- McKenzie v. McCulloch, 634 A.2d 430 (1993)
- McKenzie v. McCulloch, 634 A.2d 430 (1993)
- McKenzie v. McCulloch, 634 A.2d 430 (1993)
- McKenzie v. McCulloch, 634 A.2d 430 (1993)
- McKenzie v. McCulloch, 634 A.2d 430 (1993)
- McKenzie v. McCulloch, 634 A.2d 430 (1993)
- McKenzie v. McCulloch, 634 A.2d 430 (1993)
- McKenzie v. McCulloch, 634 A.2d 430 (1993)
- McKenzie v. McCulloch, 634 A.2d 430 (1993)
Full Text
614 charsAt trial, McKenzie made two principal contentions, as well as numerous others. His first claim, which we will call the “rent increase claim,” was that the higher rent which the McCullochs were now charging him was unlawful because substantial housing code violations existed at the time the increase was instituted, and because he had not received the notice required by law. His second claim, which we will call the “abatement claim,” was that his monthly rent for the two years from July 1, 1987 to June 29, 1989 should have been abated because substantial housing code violations existed throughout that period.