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
281 charsT R. 16(a). According to our case law, the three-day notice is mailed to tenants in order to give them an opportunity to avoid eviction by paying arrearage of rent. See Queen v. Postell, 513 A.2d 812, 814 n. 5 (D.C.1986) (citing Trans-Lux Radio City Corp. v. Service Parking Corp.,