Court Opinion

ID: 9715796
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 06:14:44.435971+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:38.191574
License: Public Domain

FERREN, Associate Judge,
concurring:
Although I generally concur in the opinion of the court, I do not subscribe to the discussion, ante at 41-43, that would preserve distinctions between the Supreme Court’s recent — and controlling — decision in Smith v. Phillips, - U.S. -, 102 S.Ct. 940, 71 L.Ed.2d 78 (1982), and this court’s earlier decisions in Cowden v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, D.C.App., 423 A.2d 936 (1980), and Marvins Credit, Inc. v. Steward, D.C.Mun.App., 133 A.2d 473 (1957).
While I do not disagree with the general proposition that Cowden and Marvins Credit may be useful precedents in contexts not now before us, I do not find persuasive the distinctions proffered here between those decisions (especially Cowden) and Smith. I therefore would prefer to withhold discussion of Cowden and Marvins Credit until we have a case where their residual value after Smith will be of actual use in resolving the matter.