# Wagshal v. Selig

> District of Columbia Court of Appeals · June 22, 1979 · 403 A.2d 338

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9535669

## Case

- **Full name:** Jerome S. WAGSHAL, Appellant, v. Barbara SELIG, Appellee
- **Court:** District of Columbia Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** June 22, 1979
- **Citations:** 403 A.2d 338; 1979 D.C. App. LEXIS 407
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Yeagley
- **Judges:** Nebeker, Yeagley, Harris
- **Cited by:** 12 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9535669

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- discussing the decline of the Aonce- popular >void ab initio= rule@ and following the Arecent trend in adopting a test of reasonableness and good faith in determining the effect which the judicial invalidation of a statute or regulation should have on the rights and obligation…
- discussing the decline of the "once-popular `void ab initio' rule" and following the "recent trend in adopting a test of reasonableness and good faith in determining the effect which the judicial invalidation of a statute or regulation should have on the rights and obligations…

## Opinion text

YEAGLEY, Associate Judge,
Retired, concurring:
I concur in the result. I have no problem with the rejection of the void ab initio rule of Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425 , 6 S.Ct. 1121 , 30 L.Ed. 178 (1886), but I do have some difficulty with the circular reasoning of the majority that brings it back to the same result as Norton . To hold retroactively that the Rent Control Regulation under which lower rents were set should not be binding on the parties during the period it was in effect, for the same reason the law was invalidated in AOBA I, is the same as invoking the void ab initio rule. Since the decision reaches a result the court refused to reach in either AOBA I or II, the holding here should be clearly restricted to the equities before us.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9535669. Public record. Not legal advice.