Leaseholds

A California appeals court has found a disclaimer of liability for negligence in a commercial lease to be enforceable and not to violate public policy even though a state statute made them invalid as to cases involving fraud, willful injuries, gross negligence, or violations of law. Garcia v. D/AQ Corp., 271 Cal. Rptr. 3d 861 (Ct. App. 2020). This case did not fit in those categories since the tenant hit his head on a low beam at the top of a flight of stairs and the landlord had not engaged in an intentional tort or willfully caused the injury. Since none of the statutory categories applied, and this involved a commercial lease, the court held that the parties had the freedom to agree to the disclaimer of tort liabilty and that this did not violate public policy under either the statute or the common law.

The Supreme Judicial Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts held, in Goreham v. Martins, 147 N.E.3d 478 (Mass. 2020), that a landlord is not liable for injuries to a tenant who slips on ice in the driveway under the implied warranty of habitability because such claims are, in effect, strict liability claims and injuries to the body in the context of landlord-tenant law are governed by the law of negligence. In this case, because the jury found the tenant to be more at fault than the landlord, there could be no recovery for negligence either under state law. The court also held that the warranty of habitability only applies to conditions inside the dwelling unit, that the landlord did not violate any provisions in the housing code, and that the tenant could have used the front entrance (rather than the rear entrance where the accident happened) and avoided injury.

When Governor Cuomo ordered most businesses to stop serving the public during the COVID-19 pandemic, some could not generate the income needed to pay rent. Some have argued that the impossibility of earning profits to pay rents should constitute a defense to the contractual obligation to pay rent. Two courts in New York have now rejected that argument, including the federal Southern District and a state supreme court. In Backal Hospitality Group LLC v. 627 West 42nd Retail LLC (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2020), the court noted that a lease term provided that if “the fixed rent [shall] become uncollectable by virtue of any law, governmental order or regulation, or direction of any public officer or body, Tenant shall enter into such agreement … as Landlord may request,…to permit Landlord to collect [rent].” Because this clause provided for negotiated settlement if a government order made rent “uncollectable,” the parties had bargained for a

Affirming a traditional rule of law, the D.C. Court of Appeals held that tenants have the right to receive guests even over the objections of the landlord. Odumn v. United States, 227 A.3d 1099 (D.C. 2020). Defendant was charged with criminal trespass for violating a no-trespass order by the landlord but because he was on the property at the invitation of his aunt, who was a tenant there, he was not committing a trespass since consent is a defense to trespass and the tenant had the right, as a tenant, to invite him to her apartment.

After years of conflicting case law, the New York legislature has formally codified the obligation of landlords to mitigate damages when a tenant breaches lease obligations by abandoning the premises. 2019 N.Y. Laws 36, §4, codified at N.Y. Real Prop. Law§227-e.

Texas law now provides that a lease terminates when a tenant dies, if the tenant’s estate gives notice to the landlord of the death and removes the deceased tenant’s belongings within 30 days. 2019 Tex. H.B. 69, codified at Tex. Prop. Code §92.0162.