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

Cormier v. McRae, 609 A.2d 676 (1992)

Citation
Cormier v. McRae, 609 A.2d 676 (1992)
Parent Document
Cormier v. McRae, 609 A.2d 676 (1992)
Jurisdiction
DC (municipal)
Effective Date
1992-05-12

Full Text

894 chars
B.
The fact that a landlord subject to § 45-2551 no longer may terminate a month-to-month tenancy under § 45-1402 without giving an adequate statutory reason, however, still leaves a critical question: given the required 30-day notice under both § 45-1402 and § 45-2551(b), does the timing provision of § 45-1402 nonetheless apply here? The answer has to be no, not because the two provisions conflict — § 45-2551(b) contains no timing provision — but because our statutory and caselaw have removed all right of a residential landlord subject to § 45-2551 to use § 45-1402 for any purpose. As we shall see, the 1980 Rental Housing Act withdrew from residential landlords the right to give merely a notice to quit, as such, for breach of a lease obligation (other than for nonpayment of rent) and, as a result, left no room for § 45-1402, including its timing provision, to apply in such a case.