Crowell v. Housing Authority of City of Dallas
16 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 359, 1973 Tex. LEXIS 277, 495 S.W.2d 887 (1973)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An exculpatory clause in a residential lease agreement between a public housing authority and a low-income tenant, which purports to absolve the authority from liability for its own negligence, is void as contrary to public policy due to the parties' unequal bargaining power.
Facts:
- The decedent, father of Lewis Crowell, leased an apartment from the Housing Authority of the City of Dallas.
- The Housing Authority had the exclusive responsibility for the maintenance and repair of a gas heater in the decedent's apartment.
- The lease agreement contained a clause stating the Housing Authority would not be liable for any damage to the person or property of the tenant from any cause whatsoever.
- The decedent died as a result of alleged carbon monoxide poisoning caused by the defective gas heater.
Procedural Posture:
- Lewis Crowell et al. (petitioners) filed suit against the Housing Authority of the City of Dallas (respondent) in a Texas district court (trial court).
- The trial court granted the Housing Authority's motion for summary judgment.
- Crowell et al. appealed to the Court of Civil Appeals (intermediate appellate court).
- The Court of Civil Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment.
- Crowell et al. then brought the case before the Supreme Court of Texas (highest court) for review.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a provision in a lease with a public housing authority that exempts the authority from all liability for damages to a tenant violate public policy?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Walker
Yes, such a provision violates public policy. While agreements exempting a party from future liability for negligence are generally valid between private parties of equal bargaining strength, they are void when one party is at such a disadvantage that they are practically compelled to accept the stipulation. The relationship between a public housing authority, created to provide safe and sanitary housing to low-income persons, and its tenants presents a classic example of unequal bargaining power. A prospective tenant has no real choice but to accept the dictated terms to secure necessary housing, rendering the exculpatory clause unenforceable.
Analysis:
This decision establishes a significant public policy exception to the general enforceability of exculpatory clauses in Texas. It extends the principle of voiding such clauses due to unequal bargaining power, previously applied to contexts like employment and public utilities, to the landlord-tenant relationship within public housing. The ruling prioritizes the statutory duty of public housing authorities to provide safe dwellings over the principle of freedom of contract. This case sets a precedent that public entities providing essential services to vulnerable populations cannot contractually waive their liability for negligence.
