Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Citation
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Parent Document
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Jurisdiction
- DC (municipal)
- Effective Date
- 2004-09-10
Other Sections in This Document (21)
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
- Hill v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc., 859 A.2d 1055 (2004)
Full Text
538 charsBoth parties agree that the address listed on the part of the writ of restitution that was mailed to Dr. Hill was incorrect and that Dr. Hill never received notice that a writ had been obtained by G.E. Capital prior to being evicted by the United States Marshal Service. Dr. Hill contends that G.E. Capital’s negligence in filling out the notice portion of the writ rendered his subsequent eviction unlawful and therefore, he is entitled to damages resulting from the eviction. G.E. Capital, on the other hand, argues that the trial *1057