believed he had such an interest, if that be disputed, was not resolvable on summary judgment. Accordingly, Matt Banks was not entitled to summary judgment. Reversed and remanded. 1 . "Put simply, ... champerty is maintaining a suit in return for a financial interest in the outcome[.]” In re Primus, 436 U.S. 412, 424 n. 15, 98 S.Ct. 1893, 56 L.Ed.2d 417 (1978). 2 . See Banks v. ESB, 8 A.3d 1239, 1241 (D.C.2010); Pappas v. ESB, 911 A.2d 1230 (D.C.2006); ESB v. Pappas, 829 A.2d 953 (D.C.2003). We note tangentially that appellant Papageorge bears the same surname as Frances Papageorge, one of the heirs who inherited the property from Achilles Pappas upon his death in 1980. See 911 A.2d at 1232 & 1232 n. 1. 3 .See Administrator of Veterans Affairs v. Valentine, 490 A.2d 1165 (D.C.1985) (<HOLDING>). We say "purported” because a September 28,
holding that the district of columbia rental housing act protected from eviction the tenant of a defaulting mortgagor who remained in his rental unit after a foreclosure sale holding that plaintiffmortgagor lacked standing to enforce the terms of a foreclosure sale since there was no statutory authority allowing a mortgagor to enforce the provisions of a sale agreement when a foreclosure purchaser is in default holding that a mortgagor is not required to prove a grossly inadequate selling price in a situation where the bidding at a nonjudicial foreclosure sale was deliberately chilled by the affirmative acts of a mortgagee and the injured mortgagor seeks a recovery of damages rather than a setting aside of the sale itself emphasis omitted holding that the fourteenth amendment does not apply to the district of columbia holding the receiver properly applied rental income from the property to the payment of common charges during the pendency of the foreclosure action