Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1883-07-07
An Evicsed Teuaus,s suit.

AJUpGhrST FoR DAMAGES AGAINST A LANDLORD
"A rev days ago Justice Walter gave his decision
IN the case OF Moses Well against Frederick Brink
mann This was an action for damages the plain
TIN claiming $780, 1t seems that more than wear
ago Well rented from Brtnkmann a room for him.
self and wife, which they occupied for the space a,
ABOUT fourteen months, paying therefor a month";
rental Well testified that the rents had been fly
paid at the time suit was commenced for nos
session. a rev days ago. The defendant, however
seslnea tnat there was small balance OF rents
Que at that time Suit was brought 70 recover nos
session before Justice Hall Change OF venue WAS
taken TO Justice Helmick, who heard the case ana
decided In favor OF Well, for the reason that tn,
thirty days notice TO quit required by the statute
had not been given. Two days later BrnImann
In the absence OF Wei according TO the testimony
eyicted him from the premises: took his goods and
cnattels 10 another part OF the building and there
stored them; locked the door OF Wells room ana
refused him admission. Well thereupon bepn a
suit for damages before Justice Walter which was
the suit decided few days ago. Well afterwards
but claimed that part OF them were missns'
10 wit: lot OF eyeglasses worth at retail abou
ia; also some valuable papers, among which was
ms discharge from the army. Justice Walter f.
his decision, said: THE plaintiff having rente.
the room by the month, at stipulated sum pc
month, and occupied IL for the spacsof fourtee .
months, was not guest, but a tenknt, and En-
Titled 10 the protection or the law In relation 10
landlord and tenant At common law there was
as many as four kinds OF tenancies In this District
by act OF Congress there are but two ana To ter,
inmate either OF these notice in writing
OF thirty days to Quit is required, (unless
It has been waived) and when that notice
has expired the law requires a seven days sun
mons ana a judgment for possession. This is Il =
only process known TO the law. IL viii not do I ,
permit the landlord TO take the law I'm his ow 4,
hands and eylct his tenant by force. The law In
TENDS 70 RTotect both parties In their rights an
both must submit TO the law. II is supreme an
The supremacy OF the law must be vindiCated b,
the courts Whereas man rents a single rooin
In building he is as much entitled to the peace
iui enjoyment OF that room as thou
ne nad rented the whole building, -
a DO Nnousn IL was mansion or a cast"
Inc wrongful act or the defendant has damac Il
tne plalntn, and the only question is the meas .
or damages IL Will not do TO say that the defei
ant was ever ignorant OF the law, because ne
Iesoroed 10 Tie law and failed. He then ejeci ::
lhe pialnun 10y force. think the plaintiff In q
case is entitled not only TO his actual damar 3
sustained In the loss OF property, but there was
loss or Time, expense OF litigation, injury to bu
ness, reputation, social standing, & :, In the W..
OF exemplary or positive damages, yet these shou
Oe guarded by the proper measure OF justice az
rignI, against any cruel hardship to the defen.-
ant" Judgment was accordingly rendered for
| pialhtlu FOR $50, and the cost OF the suit