Skip to main content
INTERNAL PROTOTYPE — NOT LEGAL ADVICE — DO NOT SEND

Luskey v. BORGER MANAGEMENT INC., 917 A.2d 631 (2007)

Citation
Luskey v. BORGER MANAGEMENT INC., 917 A.2d 631 (2007)
Parent Document
Luskey v. BORGER MANAGEMENT INC., 917 A.2d 631 (2007)
Jurisdiction
DC (municipal)
Effective Date
2007-02-15

Full Text

816 chars
Nor can the clause stating that the lease itself “shall serve as a notice to quit” in the event of failure to pay timely rent survive the statutory mandate for the detailed written, thirty-day notice required by § 42-3505.01. Compare notice provision in Rental Housing Act, D.C.Code § 42-3505.01(a) (providing that “no tenant shall be evicted from a rental unit for any reason other than for nonpayment of rent unless the tenant has been served with a written notice to vacate which meets the requirements of this section”) (emphasis added) with codification of common law in D.C.Code § 42-3208 (2001) (“Nothing herein contained shall be construed as preventing the parties to a lease, by agreement in writing, from substituting a longer or shorter notice to quit ... or to waive all such notice.”) (emphasis added).