Berg v. Slaff

5 Citing cases

  1. Remsen Partners v. Stephen A. Goldberg Co.

    755 A.2d 412 (D.C. 2000)   Cited 12 times
    Declining to require an unlicensed broker to disgorge fees paid to it where there was no bad faith involved and where the party hiring the broker profited from the broker's services

    See Beard, supra, 587 A.2d at 203 ("Equity abhors forfeitures."). Cf. Berg v. Slaff, 125 A.2d 844, 846 (D.C. 1956) (the courts have always been reluctant to enforce forfeitures). Circumstances weighing in favor of disgorgement include significant injury to the user as a result of acts of the type the statute was intended to protect against, bad faith or knowing violation of the law by the unlicensed broker, the vulnerability or relative lack of sophistication of the user of the services, and whether the applicable statute expressly or by clear implication favors, but does not require, disgorgement.

  2. Gallimore v. Washington

    666 A.2d 1200 (D.C. 1995)   Cited 13 times
    Ruling that murder of one joint tenant by the other joint tenant did not forfeit wrongdoer's own half-interest, but merely transformed the joint tenancy into a tenancy in common

    Equity abhors forfeitures. Berg v. Slaff, 125 A.2d 844, 846 (D.C. 1956). Statutes or regulations which impose forfeitures . . . are penal in nature and must be strictly construed.

  3. Sanchez v. Eleven Fourteen, Inc.

    623 A.2d 1179 (D.C. 1993)   Cited 11 times

    An obvious example is where the rental value of the property has sharply increased. Hence we have said that "[g]enerally, the measure of damages for the unlawful detention of leased premises is the fair and reasonable rental value of the property for the time it is wrongfully withheld," Berg v. Slaff, 125 A.2d 844, 846 (D.C. 1956); accord 2 FRIEDMAN, supra, § 18.2; SCHOSHINSKI, supra, § 2.24, and have recognized the proposition that the fair rental value is not necessarily determined by the amount of rent previously being paid by a holdover tenant, Young Simon, Inc. v. Brown, 387 A.2d 724, 725 (D.C. 1978); see also Novak v. Cox, 538 A.2d 747, 751 (D.C. 1988) (once notice to vacate became effective, tenant could not remain without paying the amount landlord gave notice that he would be charging). There may also be consequential damages. RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF PROPERTY, LANDLORD TENANT § 14.6 (1977) (foreseeable special damages are recoverable); 49 AM. JUR.2D Landlord Tenant § 1126 (1970) (loss of profits and other special damages are recoverable); 2 FRIEDMAN, supra, § 18.2 (landlord may in some cases recover foreseeable special damages and loss of profits); SCHOSHINSKI, supra, § 2.

  4. Beard v. Goodyear Tire Rubber Co.

    587 A.2d 195 (D.C. 1991)   Cited 102 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a plaintiff cannot rely on the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur to prove a credit card provider violated the standard of care by issuing a credit card to an imposter

    Equity abhors forfeitures. Berg v. Slaff, 125 A.2d 844, 846 (D.C. 1956). Statutes or regulations which impose forfeitures, or which provide for sanctions disproportionate to the violations or to the damage done, are penal in nature and must be strictly construed. See generally 3 N. SINGER, SUTHERLAND STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION § 59.02, at 7-8 (4th ed. 1986).

  5. Ucci v. Mancini

    120 R.I. 352 (R.I. 1978)   Cited 4 times
    Finding stipulated rent in a lease is a factor to be considered in determining reasonable rental value of property

    The injured party should be made whole, which in this case may be done by determining the reasonable rental value of the premises for the time the property was wrongfully withheld. Berg v. Slaff, 125 A.2d 844 (D.C. Mun. App. 1956); Massey v. Goforth, 305 S.W.2d 894 (Mo. App. 1957); Annot., 32 A.L.R.2d 582, § 4 (1953). The sum which such a determination yields may or may not be equal to the amount of the former rental.