Section 23A

Citation: Section 23A
Parent Document: BLT Burger DC, LLC v. Norvin 1301 CT, LLC, 86 A.3d 1139 (2014)
Jurisdiction: DC (municipal)
Effective Date: 2014-03-13
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2656505/blt-burger-dc-llc-v-norvin-1301-ct-llc/ ↗

Full Text

1,037 chars

24
         We have no way of knowing for sure whether diminished value damages,
after proper calculation, will exceed the value (after appropriate imputed
mitigation) of the unpaid “rent and other charges reserved” (quoting § 23A) over
the balance of the lease term. Landlord, however, assuredly believes that
diminished value damages will be the greater, as apparently does Tenant, whose
opening brief asserts that, “had the Lease not been breached,” Tenant “would have
paid the Landlord a little more than $2 million in rent over the next 10 years.”
Tenant, however, while arguing that the lease does not permit diminished value
damages, does not go further to contend that, if they are awardable, they must be
capped by a lower value calculated for rental stream damages under § 23A. (Nor
in any event is it immediately clear why a landlord, if compelled by circumstances
to mitigate damages by selling rather than reletting the property, should have
damages limited by a rental measure.)
                                         22

Other Sections in This Document (499)

Full Text