Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Citation
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Parent Document
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Jurisdiction
- DC (municipal)
- Effective Date
- 2003-02-20
Other Sections in This Document (25)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
- Porter Novelli, Inc. v. Bender, 817 A.2d 185 (2003)
Full Text
928 charsBoth parties then returned to landlord-tenant court and moved for release of funds in the court registry. In doing so Landlord — having prevailed initially on the ground that the lease, not the contested holdover agreement, governed the dispute — now claimed that Subtenant had been right after all, and thus that subtenant owed triple, not double, rent for the holdover period. Subtenant, to the contrary — having premised its appeal and request for stay on the validity of the holdover agreement — now claimed that Landlord had been right after all, and thus that the only law of the case, adjudicated in landlord-tenant court by reference to the lease, required double, not triple, rent. After a hearing, a third landlord-tenant judge, agreeing with subtenant that the law of the case (announced by the previous judge) was premised on rejection of the holdover agreement, awarded landlord the double rent due under the lease.