*Landlord and Tenant

Question 1

Two potential models of the law for leases:

Answer 1

• 1. License

* 2. Estate for years in land

Question 2

• 1. License

Answer 2

o If you own property, you have right to exclude; but also have right to let people onto property until you tell them to leave (hotel/inn model)
o Essentially a matter of contract
o Licenses are revocable
 Inconsistent with how we generally view a lease (can’t just be arbitrarily evicted)

Question 3

• 2. Estate for years in land

Answer 3

o Primarily used for temporary transfer of agricultural land
o Became fairly unrealistic, especially with increase in commercial leasing
o Gives too much power to tenant as present owner
 Would also impose on current tenant a duty to remove overstaying tenant
• Limitations can be imposed by landlord on tenant’s right to exclude

Question 4

Lease for Intended Use

• Anderson Drive-in Theatre v. Kirkpatrick – IN (1953)

Answer 4

o F: P rents property from D for 25 years to build/operate movie theatre; land was not suitable for building the theatre (would sink)
o H: For D; Caveat emptor (exception exists for fraud and misrepresentation of latent defects that landlord knew of)
 Here, P had reasonable opportunity to inspect before renting
 If concerned, could have added “but if” clause to the lease (condition subsequent that would give tenant right to terminate)
o Traditional rule here – doesn’t differentiate between residential and commercial
• Alternative rule to Anderson – when LL knows purpose for which land is being rented, and knows that land is not suitable for that use, landlord is liable (implied covenant)
• Modern application – implied warranty of habitability into residential leases (different for commercial leases)

Question 5

Duty to Put Tenant Into Possession

• Adrian v. Rabinowitz – NJ (1935)

Answer 5

o F: Took 22 days for LL D to remove previous tenant from premises; P tenant had already paid rent
o H: LL must bear the loss for the 22 days rent and P’s lost profits from not being able to operate store (LL can subsequently collect from overstaying tenant)
 Ct. announces duty to put tenant into possession falls on the LL
 Traditional rule is that duty falls on tenant
 English rule: LL has duty b/c better positioned to remove the holdover tenant
o Note – this could be solved through K too (put covenant that LL ousts previous tenant)

Question 6

implied warranty of habitability

Answer 6

(Unwaivable): IWH LL must keep premises fit for habitation (repair/maintenance)—according to housing codes—and cannot evict tenant in retaliation for failure to pay rent or reporting violations