Home Rentals Corp. v. Curtis
602 N.E.2d 859, 176 Ill. Dec. 913, 236 Ill. App. 3d 994 (1992)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A landlord's omission or failure to remedy severe defects that render a premises uninhabitable constitutes a constructive eviction, relieving the tenant of their lease obligations, provided the tenant gives the landlord a reasonable opportunity to make repairs before vacating.
Facts:
- In February 1989, Chris Curtis, Ed Domaracki, Mike Fraser, and Carson Flugstad (Defendants), all students, signed a one-year lease with Home Rentals Corporation for a house to be provided 'in good order and repair' starting August 17, 1989.
- The students paid Home Rentals a total of $1,980 for a security deposit and the last two months' rent.
- Upon arriving on August 15, Mike Fraser discovered the house was uninhabitable due to a severe roach infestation, filth, holes in the walls, and unsanitary bathrooms.
- On August 17, Fraser discovered that none of the toilets functioned and that bathroom wastewater drained directly onto the basement floor.
- Fraser notified Home Rentals of the filth and roach problem on August 16 and the plumbing issues on August 17.
- Over the next four days, Home Rentals' only action was to send an exterminator, whose efforts were ineffective, and to suggest the tenants clean the property themselves.
- The students were never able to spend a night in the house due to its condition and attempted to clean it themselves without success.
- On August 21, the students vacated the premises, returned the keys to Home Rentals, and reported the conditions to the city's Code Enforcement Division.
Procedural Posture:
- Home Rentals Corporation (plaintiff) sued the four tenants (defendants) in the circuit court of Jackson County for breach of contract, seeking unpaid rent for the entire lease term.
- The defendants raised the affirmative defense of constructive eviction and filed a counterclaim to recover their $500 security deposit and $1,480 in advance rent.
- The trial court, sitting without a jury, entered a judgment against Home Rentals on its claim and in favor of the defendants on their counterclaim for $1,980 plus costs.
- Home Rentals' post-trial motion was denied.
- Home Rentals (appellant) appealed the judgment to the Illinois Appellate Court, Fifth District; the students are the appellees.
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 landlord's failure to remedy severe conditions, such as roach infestation, non-functional plumbing, and extreme filth, after receiving notice from the tenants, constitute a constructive eviction that justifies the tenants abandoning the premises and recovering their security deposit and advance rent?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Harrison
Yes, the landlord's failure to remedy the severe conditions constituted a constructive eviction. A constructive eviction occurs when a landlord commits an act or omission of a grave and permanent character that renders the premises useless to the tenant or deprives them of its enjoyment. The court found that the conditions—including roach infestation, non-functional toilets, and open sewage drainage—were not minor inconveniences but made the house unquestionably unfit for human habitation. The tenants provided Home Rentals with a reasonable opportunity to correct the defects by notifying them of all complaints by August 17, four full days before they vacated. Considering the magnitude of the problems, this period was sufficient, and Home Rentals' minimal response justified the tenants' decision to abandon the property and terminate the lease.
Analysis:
This decision reaffirms and clarifies the doctrine of constructive eviction, particularly emphasizing that a landlord's failure to act (an omission) can be as potent as an affirmative act in depriving a tenant of the enjoyment of the premises. It sets a practical precedent that a 'reasonable opportunity' for a landlord to cure defects can be a relatively short period, such as four days, when the defects are severe and render the property uninhabitable. The case strengthens tenants' rights by underscoring the landlord's fundamental duty to deliver a habitable property at the commencement of a lease, providing a clear remedy for tenants who are presented with unlivable conditions.
