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
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/5147069/clark-v-bridges/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (34)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
- Clark v. Bridges, 75 A.3d 149 (2013)
Full Text
502 chars. Moreover, the landlord claimed at trial that he had been advised by an official of the District of Columbia Housing Authority that once he had been informed of an official complaint for repairs — as the tenant made here — he was entitled to enter the premises to inspect and carry out repairs upon giving previous notice. Thus it appears that the landlord did not think he was impeded by the tenant's failure to grant him consent to enter the premises and his actions confirm that in fact he was not.