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

Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)

Citation
Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
Parent Document
Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
Jurisdiction
DC (municipal)
Effective Date
2013-08-22

Full Text

666 chars
.The landlord conceded that he was able to enter the premises and make repairs, even though he felt that on “many occasions” he was not allowed to access the property. He explained that he "set a time from the hours of nine a.m. to four o’clock p.m. to enter the premises” because "usually during this period ... [t]he tenant is not there.” He and his contractors would then "go in and do the work” and "clean up and leave the premises.” When asked how he entered the property, the landlord explained his understanding that if he had not heard from the tenant after giving twenty-four hour’s notice of his intention to enter the home, he could simply enter the home.