Court Opinion

ID: 9535669
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 04:51:48.390426+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:33:18.095207
License: Public Domain

YEAGLEY, Associate Judge,
Retired, concurring:
I concur in the result. I have no problem with the rejection of the void ab initio rule of Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, 6 S.Ct. 1121, 30 L.Ed. 178 (1886), but I do have some difficulty with the circular reasoning of the majority that brings it back to the same result as Norton. To hold retroactively that the Rent Control Regulation under which lower rents were set should not be binding on the parties during the period it was in effect, for the same reason the law was invalidated in AOBA I, is the same as invoking the void ab initio rule. Since the decision reaches a result the court refused to reach in either AOBA I or II, the holding here should be clearly restricted to the equities before us.