Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Citation
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Parent Document
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Jurisdiction
- DC (municipal)
- Effective Date
- 2001-09-13
Other Sections in This Document (36)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
- Grimes v. Newsome, 780 A.2d 1119 (2001)
Full Text
884 charsAppellants, Fred and Frances Grimes, appeal from a judgment granting possession of a leased house to appellee, Thelma Newsome. Appellants, as tenants under the lease, repeatedly failed to pay then-rent on time. As a result, Ms. Newsome, appellants’ landlord, served them with a “30 day notice to correct or vacate,” pursuant to D.C.Code § 45-2551(b) (1996). When appellants faded to cure their late payments of the rent within the thirty-day period, Ms. Newsome filed a complaint against Mr. and Mrs. Grimes in the Landlord and Tenant Branch of the Superior Court. In due course, after a non-jury trial, the court entered a judgment of possession in favor of Ms. Newsome. On appeal from that judgment, appellants assert that the trial court erred in ruling (1) that the notice to correct or vacate was valid and (2) that they received adequate notice of their violations. We affirm. I