RHOL.COM
Rental Housing On Line
The Internet's comprehensive rental property location
 

Nonpayment of Rent

Tenant stops paying rent, claiming landlord wouldn't fix air conditioner

Westwood Group Partnership v. Moore, Court of Appeals of Tennessee, Eastern Section, at Knoxville, No. 03AOI-9805-CV-00155 (1998)

Question before the court:

      Was tenant justified in withholding rent because of inadequate air-conditioning?

Facts of the case:

      Moore leased office space for his medical practice from Westwood Group Partnership in January 1995. The lease called for monthly rent of $800, which could increase by up to 6 percent each year. The lease also provided that in the event of litigation the prevailing party was entitled to all costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees. In 1996 the rent increased to $848, which Moore paid. In 1997 the rent increased to $898. According to the landlord, Moore paid only $848 rent in January and February 1987, and paid the additional $100 due for those two months only after the landlord demanded payment. Moore paid $848 rent in March, April, and May of 1997, and stopped paying rent completely in June.

      In early June 1997, Moore sent the landlord a letter stating he refused to pay the rent because the landlord wouldn't repair the air conditioner. The landlord sent Moore a termination letter giving him 60 days to move out, based on his continued refusal to pay rent. Moore moved out in September 1997.

      The landlord sued Moore for breaching the lease, seeking unpaid rent, late fees, and attorneys' fees.

      At trial, Moore argued he was justified in not paying the rent because the landlord refused to repair the air conditioner, leaving the office unbearably hot. He claimed the unit was never able to cool the office, which he said threatened some of his patients' health. Moore said he called a repair service several times to have the system repaired and paid the bill himself. His employee testified the office was very hot and she had called the repair service several times. She didn't say the landlord had ever refused to have the air conditioner fixed.

      The landlord's manager said Moore had complained several times about the air conditioning, and that each time she or her husband fixed the unit or had a repair service come immediately. She said the problem was usually a clogged filter, and the unit worked fine once the filter was cleaned. Another tenant in the building testified that she was in Moore's clinic frequently and had never noticed it being uncomfortably warm. The other tenant said she had never heard anyone complain about the beat, and said her own system worked fine.

      The repair service's owner testified that he worked on the air conditioner about three times, once for a dirty filter and twice for other power problems. He said the unit was more than adequate to cool the office space, but also said Moore's employee told him she sometimes turned the air conditioner off at night and turned it back on during the day. According to the repair service's owner, this could overwork the system. Finally, the owner said the landlord, not Moore, had paid all of his bills.

Trial court finds for landlord

      The court found Moore breached the lease. It ordered him to pay rent, late fees, and attorneys' fees totally almost $5,400.

Tenant appealed.

DECISION: Affirmed.

      The trial court properly ordered Moore to pay rent, late fees, and attorneys' fees.

      Although Moore claimed the landlord's refusal to repair his space's air conditioner justified his not paying the rent, there was more than enough evidence to justify the trial court's finding that Moore breached the lease by failing to pay the rent. Though Moore testified to the contrary, the court reasonably found the landlord promptly had the air conditioner repaired at its own expense each time there was a problem. The repairman said he had fixed the unit at least three times, always at the landlord's expense. Another tenant in the building said she was frequently in Moore's office and never noticed it was too hot.

      The landlord also successfully argued on appeal that it was entitled to additional attorneys' fees because Moore's appeal was frivolous. The court agreed, and ordered the trial court to determine and award the landlord its reasonable costs associated with defending Moore's appeal.

Also see: Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. Taylor, 590 S. W2d 920 (1977).