Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Satin v. Buckley, 246 A.2d 778 (1968)

Citation
Satin v. Buckley, 246 A.2d 778 (1968)
Parent Document
Satin v. Buckley, 246 A.2d 778 (1968)
Jurisdiction
DC (municipal)
Effective Date
1968-10-24

Full Text

713 chars
The tenant also argues that it was error for the court to consider the alleged repairs to personalty on the leased premises since this claim was not, and could not have been included in the original complaint. But inasmuch as this issue of damages was raised by way of defense to the tenant’s counterclaim, it was properly before the court. George Y. Worthington & Son Management Corp. v. Levy, D.C.App., 204 A.2d 334 (1964). Other points raised regarding these items of damage concern factual determinations of the court which were adverse to the tenant. We have considered them all and hold that the evidence, properly admitted, suffices to support the court’s findings. Accordingly, the judgment is Affirmed. 1