Posted by jane on June 16, 1999 at 23:46:13:
The building was sold and the new owner wanted to get an eviction on the old landlords judgment against my apartment without making a motion to substitute as a party. So the old landlord had a marshal requisition a warrant 10 days after the sale under the old landlords name. The marshal couldn't execute the warrant because the department of investigations wouldn't let them, because the party listed as landlord/ petitioner was incorrect. 6 months later, after I was harassed to get out, the new landlord finally figured out they had to make a motion to substitute into the old case to amend the caption to add their name on the warrant. I'm saying the warrant should be vacated as defective since it was obtained when the old owner didn't have a right to do so but the judge allowed it when she granted the caption to be amended with the new owners name. I'm just against the injustice that after the 1st landlord sold the property, he had the nerve to get a warrant, when he no longer had a standing in the case and was not entitled to possession of my apartment. Why should the new owner benefit from an illegal warrant when they should have to requisition a new warrant.
Note: Posting is disabled in all archives
Post a Followup