Berg v. Slaff, 125 A.2d 844 (1956)

Citation: Berg v. Slaff, 125 A.2d 844 (1956)
Parent Document: Berg v. Slaff, 125 A.2d 844 (1956)
Jurisdiction: DC (municipal)
Effective Date: 1956-10-12
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1493187/berg-v-slaff/ ↗

Full Text

553 chars

But what if the damages incurred by the landlord exceeded the sum deposited by the tenant? Under such circumstances and under the wording of the provision, could he not claim that he is entitled to the deficiency? It will be observed that nowhere in the provision did the parties refer to the deposit as being one for liquidated damages, and although, as stated before, the use or nonuse of that term is not controlling, its absence viewed together with the language of the provision leads us to the conclusion that liquidated damages were not intended.

Other Sections in This Document (23)

Full Text