Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

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

Full Text

929 chars
It is suggested that by analogy, since a tenant is entitled to notice, a roomer is also entitled to some notice. But the notice to the tenant is required by statute, and we have no such statute relating to roomers. Furthermore, the notice to the tenant is required in order to terminate the tenant’s estate. The roomer has no estate to be terminated. A roomer’s right to use of the premises depends on his contract with respect thereto, and what notice, if any, is required to terminate his right to such use, in the absence of fault on his part, depends on the particular circumstances of the case. But here there is no claim that the roomer by reason of any contractual provision or agreement was entitled to notice in the event of his default in payment of rent. Even the tenant may waive his statutory notice12 and practically all written leases and other rental agreements provide for waiver of notice on nonpayment of rent.