Background

• Deutsche Bank National Trust foreclosed Crockett's home in December 2009 and purchased the property at foreclosure.
• The Trust served Crockett with a 30-day quit notice and filed for possession in the Landlord and Tenant Court after Crockett remained on the premises.
• Crockett's answer claimed no right to cure the mortgage default and indicated an attempt to repurchase the home; the court issued a protective order requiring $4,691/month into the court registry, which Crockett did not pay.
• As a sanction for nonpayment into the registry, the trial court entered a non-redeemable judgment for possession in favor of the Trust and later denied reconsideration.
• Crockett appealed, arguing Rule 12-I(g)(2)(B) prohibits possession as a sanction in a case without a landlord-tenant relationship and without a rent claim.
• The court held that Rule 12-I(g)(2)(B) does not apply where there is no contractual landlord-tenant relationship, and affirmed the trial court’s sanction granting possession.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Nicholas v. Howard, 459 A.2d 1039 (D.C.1983) (squatter as tenant at will after foreclosure; no landlord-tenant privity)
• Taylor v. First Am. Title Co., 509 A.2d 96 (D.C.1986) (tenancy after foreclosure not contractual; cure not guaranteed)
• Simpson v. Jack Spicer Real Estate, Inc., 396 A.2d 212 (D.C.1978) (distinction between common-law tenant and statutory tenant under renters' statute)
• Lindsey v. Prillman, 921 A.2d 782 (D.C.2007) (protective orders outside landlord-tenant context questioned but sometimes allowed)
• Davis v. Rental Associates, Inc., 456 A.2d 820 (D.C.1983) (required considerations before striking pleadings and granting possession as sanction)