Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Citation
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Parent Document
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Jurisdiction
- DC (municipal)
- Effective Date
- 1947-11-12
Other Sections in This Document (21)
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
- Tamamian v. Gabbard, 55 A.2d 513 (1947)
Full Text
759 charsThe agreed statement on appeal recites that plaintiff was a roomer in a rooming house operated by defendants, that defendants owned the furniture and furnishings in the room, had access to the room, supplied linens, towels, etc., and rendered daily maid service, and that plaintiff paid a weekly rental of $7.50. The question of whether the occupant of premises has the status of a roomer or a tenant is sometimes a close one.2 That the occupancy relates to one room only is not the decisive factor, for a tenancy may exist with respect to a single room as well as to many rooms. However, on the agreed statement here it seems quite plain that plaintiff was a roomer, unless, as he contends, he is entitled to the status of a tenant by reason of the Rent Act.