Heitmuller v. Berkow

51 A.2d 302, 1947 D.C. App. LEXIS 110
CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals
DecidedFebruary 6, 1947
DocketNo. 450
StatusPublished

This text of 51 A.2d 302 (Heitmuller v. Berkow) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District of Columbia Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Heitmuller v. Berkow, 51 A.2d 302, 1947 D.C. App. LEXIS 110 (D.C. 1947).

Opinion

CAYTON, Chief Judge.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Municipal .Court awarding plaintiff $210, covering double the amount of excess rent collected by defendant in violation of the District of Columbia Emergency Rent Act, (Code 1940, 45 — 1610) together with an attorney’s fee of $50.

The only question on this appeal is whether the claim was barred by the one-year limitation as an action “for a statutory penalty or forfeiture.” That question we have today decided adversely to appellant’s contention in Shenk v. Cohen, D.C.Mun.App., 51 A.2d 298. Consequently, the judgment must be affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Shenk v. Cohen
51 A.2d 298 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1947)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
51 A.2d 302, 1947 D.C. App. LEXIS 110, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/heitmuller-v-berkow-dc-1947.