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
517 charsAppellants also argue that the notice was inadequate under 14 DCMR § 4301.2 because it did not specify what actions they needed to take in order to avoid an eviction. We disagree. The notice specifically stated that appellants had violated their obligations under the lease by their “[n]onpayment of rent $2,400.00 [and] consistent late payments of rent....” Appellants’ tardy payment and non-payment of the rent were clear violations of the lease. The notice they received, like the notice in Pritch, expressly *1123