Court Opinion

ID: 9698499
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 19:52:07.537585+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:20:41.337391
License: Public Domain

NEWMAN, Associate Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part:
I join in so much of the judgment of the court as holds constitutionally valid the tenant consent part of the statute. I dissent from the remand on the “taking” issue. Given the fact that Hornstein’s complaint did not allege an unconstitutional uncompensated taking (as distinguished from the tenant consent issue) it is not surprising to me that the District did not move for summary judgment on that question. In his opposition to summary judgment, Horn-stein never raised this as an issue. Thus, it *539is not surprising to me, in this context, that the trial court did not consider as an issue something that no party raised by pleading or otherwise. I am unable to join my colleagues in ruling that this was error by the trial court.