Harris v. N. L. Sansbury Co.

279 F. 1015, 51 App. D.C. 377, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 1661
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedApril 3, 1922
DocketNo. 3627
StatusPublished

This text of 279 F. 1015 (Harris v. N. L. Sansbury Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Harris v. N. L. Sansbury Co., 279 F. 1015, 51 App. D.C. 377, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 1661 (D.C. Cir. 1922).

Opinions

VAN ORSDEL, Associate Justice.

This is a landlord and tenant proceeding, instituted by appellee company in the municipal court of the District to secure possession of an apartment. Judgment for possession was entered, from which appellant appealed to the Supreme Court of the District, where affidavits of merit and defense were filed. On motion by appellee company for judgment because of the insufficiency of the affidavit of defense under the nineteenth rule, judgment was entered, from which the case comes here on appeal.

The affidavit of defense, among other things, alleges that, before the service of notice to quit, the case had been submitted to the rent commission, where an order was made establishing the rental at $50 per month. A certified copy of the order was attached to the affidavit. The affidavit contained a further averment that this fact had been set up and presented in the municipal court.

This averment in the affidavit of defense was sufficient to deprive the municipal court of jurisdiction to proceed further in the case. Smith v. Pyne et al.,-App. D. C.-, 274 Fed. 142.

The judgment is reversed, with costs, and cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Smith v. Pyne
274 F. 142 (D.C. Circuit, 1921)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
279 F. 1015, 51 App. D.C. 377, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 1661, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harris-v-n-l-sansbury-co-cadc-1922.