Landlord-Tenant Law Flashcards
(16 cards)
Adrian v Rabinowitz (Landlord failed to provide actual possession of the rental to the tenant because previous tenant occupied).
A landlord is under a duty to put a lessee in both actual and legal possession at the beginning of the lease term.
Blackett v. Olanoff (L rented an adjacent building to a bar and failed to enforce a provision in the lease prohibiting music so loud that it could be heard outside the building by residential Ts)
A landlord may be responsible for violating a tenant’s right to quiet enjoyment, even in the absence of an overt act by the landlord, in situations in which the landlord has the ability to control the condition causing the breach of quiet enjoyment and fails to take corrective action.
Brown v Southall Realty Co
(District of Columbia Housing Regulations require rental properties to be kept in a safe and sanitary manner, or else the property cannot be offered for rent. P owned property with several housing code violations and rented the property to D without any repairs. P sued D for falling behind on payments, which D admitted. But D argued that the lease was an illegal contract due to the living conditions of the apartment.)
A contract made in violation of a statutory prohibition is void and confers no rights upon the wrongdoer, as long as the prohibition is meant to serve as a penalty.
Sommer v. Kridel (L leased to T1, but failed to mitigate by allowing others to lease when T1 cannot continue the lease, and therefore, no dmg)
A landlord has a duty to mitigate damages when seeking to recover rents due from a defaulting tenant.
Medico-Dental Building v. Horton and Converse
(L to X agreeing not to lease to someone of similar industry; then L leased to X2, and was in the same industry as X).
A tenant’s obligation to pay rent is dependent on the landlord’s compliance with a restrictive covenant in the lease, if the landlord’s breach of the covenant will defeat the purpose of the lease.
Restrictive covenant stating no competition of another tenant in the same business is material
Javins v. First National Realty Corp.
(Lessor sought to evict Ts who had withheld rent because of numerous violations of the D.C. Housing Regulations that had occurred after they leased their apartments)
Residential leases contain an implied-warranty-of-habitability term requiring the landlord to maintain the premises in a livable condition.
Edwards v Habib
(D/T rented residential property under a month-to-month lease from P/L. D reported sanitary code violations. Then P gave D a 30-day notice of eviction.)
A tenant who reports housing-code violations may invoke retaliatory motives as a defense to eviction.
Robinson v. Diamond
(D/T entered into a month-to-month lease with P/L for a residence with the understanding that L would repair several unsafe defects on the property that were in violation of the housing code. L did not make the repairs, so T stopped rent payments. Then L sued T to evict T. T succeeded in convincing jury that the lease was invalid due to the housing code violations. Then L brought a subsequent action to evict T based on the thirty days’ notice to vacate that L provided. T argued that this was retaliatory eviction for L’s failure to succeed in the previous action.)
A landlord must come forward with a legitimate business reason to evict a tenant after failing to evict said tenant for failure to pay rent.
Fair Housing Council of San Fernando Valley v. Roommate.com
The antidiscrimination provisions of the FHA do not apply to the selection of roommates. The FHA prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, or national origin in the “sale or rental of a dwelling.”
Jancik v Department of Housing and Urban Development
(D published an ad for a rental apartment stating a preference for a “mature person.” A public interest organization sent undercover lessees to inquire about the rental, one white woman and one black woman. D expressed a preference on familial status and asked undercover lessees to identify race.)
Evidence of intent to discriminate in the rental of housing will support a conclusion that an advertisement for housing violates the Fair Housing Act even when discriminatory intent is not explicitly stated in the advertisement.
Sargent v Ross
(Tina Sargent’s daughter Anna died after falling from a steep outdoor stairway at a residential building owned by Fabiola Ross.)
L is liable if L created an unreasonable risk and foreseeable harm resulted VS
A landlord should exercise reasonable care not to subject others to an unreasonable risk of harm.
(1) a hidden danger in the premises of which the landlord, but not the tenant, is aware; (2) premises that are leased for public use; (3) premises that are under the landlord’s control, such as common stairways; and (4) premises that are negligently repaired by the landlord.
Walls v Oxford Management Co Inc
(P was sexually assaulted in the parking lot of the apartment complex where P lived. The complex was managed by D.)
a landlord is under no duty to protect tenants from criminal attack.
Commonwealth Bldg Corp v Hirschfield
(P and D entered into a lease that stated that if D remained on the property beyond the expiration date (Sept. 30), D would be liable for double rent. When the lease’s expiration date approached, D began moving out starting from Sept. 27 and worked every day but unable to finish on time. D eventually finished on the morning of Oct. 1. P declared that D was a holdover tenant for another year due to this delay, now liable for a year’s worth of double rent.)
L may hold T liable for another lease term if T holds over, but only if the hold-over was voluntary, conveying an intention to hold over, or the tenant’s holding over requires imposition of a new tenancy in the interest of justice.
A landlord may hold a tenant liable for another lease term if a tenant holds over, provided that the holding over was voluntary, conveying an intention to hold over, or the tenant’s holding over requires imposition of a new tenancy in the interest of justice.
Jaber v. Miller
(D entered into a lease with L that was to end on March 1, 1951. In 1949, D transferred D’s lease to T2. The document involved in this transfer was entitled, “Contract and Assignment.” T2 paid $700 for the assignment, with five promissory notes for the same amount payable to D. T2 then transferred the lease to P. Before the end of the lease, the leased premise burned down. P wanted promissory notes cancelled, arguing that the transfer to T2 was a sublease, and that the promissory notes were considered rent that would cease when the building burned down (lease contained a fire clause))
The intention of the parties will govern whether a transfer of a lease is to be considered a sublease or an assignment.
Kendall v. Ernest Pestana, Inc.
(Bixler was subleasing hangar space at the San Jose Airport from Ernest Pestana, Inc. (defendant). Bixler then entered into an agreement to sell his business, including the lease, to Kendall (plaintiff). Ernest Pestana refused to consent to the assignment of the lease to Kendall. Kendall then brought suit seeking a declaration that Ernest Pestana’s refusal to consent to the assignment was unreasonable and therefore invalid as an unlawful restraint on alienation. The lower court found in favor of Ernest Pestana. Kendall appealed.)
A commercial lessor may not unreasonably withhold its consent to an assignment of a lease, with or without a clause requiring the landlord’s consent to transfer the lease.
U S Nat Bank of Oregon v Homeland Inc
(D leased office space from L but abandoned the premise before expiration of the lease and stopped paying rent. The property sat vacant for a while and then relet it to a new T for a higher rent price than what D paid and for a duration that extended beyond D’s lease term. Then T2 defaulted and abandoned before lease expiration and L found T3. L’s receiver (P/bank) sued to enforce L’s rights against D, seeking damages in the amount of D’s rent due under the terms of D’s lease subtracted by the amount received from T2, for the period of time between D’s default and the start of the lease to T3.)
A tenant’s obligation to pay rent continues until the end of the lease term even when the premises are rented to a second tenant at a higher rental rate for a portion of the original lease term.
