Reshard v. Stevenson (2022)

Citation: Reshard v. Stevenson (2022)
Parent Document: Reshard v. Stevenson (2022)
Jurisdiction: DC (municipal)
Effective Date: 2022-02-24
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6444934/reshard-v-stevenson/ ↗

Full Text

1,307 chars

5
         Three days before the hearing, Ms. Reshard filed a motion requesting that
the court deem the stay motion an emergency and grant an immediate hearing. She
argued in part that the default had been entered in contravention of the court’s
scheduling policies and ordinary practice. Judge Brian Holeman denied the
emergency motion in light of the proximity of the scheduled hearing, finding in part
that Ms. Reshard had not demonstrated a substantial likelihood that she would
“prevail . . . on the merits of the underlying case for possession based upon [Ms.
Reshard’s] alleged violation of the lease.” The case for possession was not premised
on a lease violation and it is not clear to what this refers.
      6
        The motion for relief from the default judgment was not withdrawn, and
both parties continued to treat that motion as pending notwithstanding the
withdrawal of the stay motion.
      7
         Ms. Reshard attached as an exhibit to her March 5 reply an email from Mr.
Kirtley to Ms. Stevenson’s counsel requesting, in part, “counsel’s agreement not to
seek a writ of restitution until the motion to vacate default is ruled on.” Counsel for
Ms. Stevenson denied that such an agreement was reached.
                                          5 of restitution to evict Ms. Reshard.

Other Sections in This Document (262)

Full Text