It appears, however, that she settled with D.C. last week and got $180,000 for their failure to tell her that it was on the demolition list when she purchased it.
I am surprised that the demolition lien wasn't addressed in last week's settlement one way or the other.
It probably was.
This sounds like an omnibus settlement.
The City apparently concealed - or just plain didn't know about - it's own demolition order. Fault to the city.
The City is entitled to be paid for demolition of delapidated buildings.
So, they probably set the settlement amount at a level that would pay her her damages, and pay her enough to pay for the demolition, while still requiring her to pay for that demolition. Probably the City cannot easily waive demolition costs without political action that might not be forthcoming.
If both sides weren't satisfied, one side would not have settled. As it stands, they did. She's getting in her digs, but she essentially got the property for free.