Camalier & Buckley-Madison, Inc. v. The Madison Hotel, Inc., 513 F.2d 407 (1975)

Citation: Camalier & Buckley-Madison, Inc. v. The Madison Hotel, Inc., 513 F.2d 407 (1975)
Parent Document: Camalier & Buckley-Madison, Inc. v. The Madison Hotel, Inc., 513 F.2d 407 (1975)
Jurisdiction: DC (municipal)
Effective Date: 1975-05-22
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/326412/camalier-buckley-madison-inc-v-t... ↗

Full Text

946 chars

Because the case must be retried, we pass over two additional contentions urged. One stems from a ruling by the trial judge excluding the testimony of a witness for Madison and Coyne. Their trial counsel did not include the witness on his list of pretrial witnesses and did not proffer what the witness was expected to testify to. These problems can be avoided on retrial if the testimony of the witness is still desired. The other contention is that Coyne was not a party to the lease between Madison and Camalier, and for that reason could not properly be held liable for breach of contract. We perceive no barrier, however, to Coyne’s liability on the counts of trespass and wrongful eviction if warranted by the evidence, and we note that there was testimony that Coyne instructed Madison’s employees to lock Camalier out of the shop. In any event, we leave the ruling as is pending the outcome of the new trial. 106 . See Part IV, supra. 107

Other Sections in This Document (190)

Full Text