274 F. 142 | D.C. Cir. | 1921
The Pynes sued in the municipal court to recover possession from Smith of premises which they claimed the latter held without right, and recovered a judgment for what they de-sii-ed. Smith appealed to the Supreme Court. Within the time allowed by law the Pynes filed an affidavit of merit and asked for judgment under the nineteenth rule. Smith, by plea and his affidavit of defense, set forth that the Pynes had instituted a proceeding before the rent commission for the same cause of action as that pleaded in this case, and that the proceeding was still pending and undetermined, and for that reason he challenged the jurisdiction of the court to advance until the .-commission had disposed of it. His challenge was overruled, and the motion for judgment sustained, tie appeals.
For the error pointed out, the judgment is reversed, at the cost of the appellee, and the case remanded for further proceedings.
Reversed.
<§^>For other cases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes