Running head: HOME RENTALS CORP. V.

CURTIS

COMMERCIAL LAW CASE: HOME RENTALS CORP. V. CURTIS

[Name]
[Course]
[Date]

HOME RENTALS CORP. V. CURTIS

Commercial Law Case: Home Rentals Corp. v. Curtis
A. Legal Cognizance
1. Facts:
a. Briefly describe the facts.
Chris Curtis and his schoolmates, Fraser, Domaracki,and Flugstad rented a home from
Home Rentals Corp on February 1989. They were to move into the house on 17th August 1989.
They paid a deposit of $500 for the house and $1480 advance rent for two months. The home
was in good condition when they signed the agreement. However, when they wanted to move
into the home on August the same year, the house was extremely filthy and uninhabitable. Curtis
and his roommates attempted cleaning the house, but they could not manage to make it habitable.
They sought housing elsewhere and notified Home Rentals about the problem and clean the
house within 72 hours. However, Home Rentals cleaned the house but sued Curtis for breach of
their lease agreement. Curtis countersued Home Rentals for the deposit and advance rent paid
totaling $1980.
b. Which facts were key to the outcome?
The home was totally inhabitable due to extreme dirtiness. There were roaches all over
the home, the kitchen was infested with bugs, the toilets, bathtubs and sewage drainage were
faulty, and electricity was not turned on. The tenants had to leave the house and seek housing
elsewhere.

HOME RENTALS CORP. V. CURTIS

2. Legal issue:
a. What legal issue(s) does this case illustrate (i.e. why is this case in the chapter)?
The case demonstrates a legal issue of constructive eviction. According to Gray (2005),
constructive eviction is a legal doctrine on eviction that states that a tenant is relieved of his or
her lease obligations whenever a property is no longer useful for the purpose it was meant to
fulfill, thereby making the tenant abandon the specific property (p. 1293). In this legal case,
Curtis abandoned the home for it was no longer habitable.
b. What are all of the elements of the main legal rule that this case illustrates? For instance,
if the case is about undue influence, list ALL of the elements that the court in this case said
had to be proven by the plaintiff.
The case, being a constructive eviction case, had the following elements that required
being proven: There was substantial injury on the tenants beneficial use and enjoyment of the
property, the landlord committed omissions or acts that rendered the leased home useless or
inhabitable, and the tenant was wrongfully evicted.
B. Expand Perspective, Gain Interpersonal Understanding, and Critically Assess
Implications
3. Winning Party
a. What legal arguments were made by the party who won in this court decision?
Curtis was the winning party in the court decision. The legal explanations presented by Curtis
were that they were forced to abandon the leased home because it was in an uninhabitable
condition.

HOME RENTALS CORP. V. CURTIS

b. What facts, legal reasoning, social policy, and ethical principles would support a ruling
for the winning party?
The facts that supported Curtis were that the home was no longer habitable due to
deplorable conditions. It was up to the landlord to ensure that the home was in a habitable, but
that was not the case by the time the tenants were to move into the home.
c. What were the probable motivations behind the winning partys actions leading up to the
dispute?
The motivations that led to the legal suit were that the winning party, the tenants, had to
abandon the lease and seek alternative housing. Curtis and his roommates had signed a lease
when the home was in good condition, but by the time they were to move it, they found it
uninhabitable, therefore abandoning the home.
4. Losing partys point of view:
a. What legal arguments were made by the losing party?
The losing party was on the view that the tenants had breached the agreement. Home
Rentals argued that the tenants breached the lease by abandoning the home.

b. What facts, legal reasoning, social policy, and ethical principles would support a ruling
for the losing party?
The tenants abandoned a home leased to them and indeed sought housing elsewhere.
Home Rentals did not find such an act as legally and ethically right.

HOME RENTALS CORP. V. CURTIS

c. What were the probable motivations behind the losing partys actions leading up to the
dispute? After the dispute?
Home Rentals were motivated to sue Curtis since they signed a lease agreement, only to
abandon it later on and sought housing elsewhere. Under the lease agreement, Home Rentals
would claim twelve months rent amounting to $6,900 since the lease was abandoned by the
tenants, and therefore sued Curtis.
5. The point of view of the highest court which ruled in this case:
a. What rule did the court apply?
The court applied the rule of constructive eviction and ruled in favor of the tenants. The
landlord appealed the case, and the appellate court also found that there was constructive
eviction in the case. The court supported the tenant to be awarded damages.
b. What facts, legal reasoning, social policy, and ethical principles did the court use to
support its ruling?
The court used elements of constructive eviction to support and justify its verdict. The
court was on the view that it was totally wrong for the tenants to be paying a rent of $750
monthly for a home inhabited with roaches and had drainage problems. The tenants had to
abandon the property for it was not in a habitable condition by the time they were to move it,
making the case fulfill the requirements of being considered a constructive eviction.
c. What were the probable motivations behind the courts decision?

HOME RENTALS CORP. V. CURTIS

The court was motivated to make their verdict in favor of the tenants since the landlord
failed to ensure that the home was habitable. The tenants were left with no choice but to abandon
the property and seek alternative housing.
C. Find Recent Developments and Diverse Theories, Synthesize, and Compare
6. Different Rules or Facts: What if the court adopted a different legal rule?
a. Search the web for other articles or a similar case or call an attorney or business
professional who may have experience with this type of issue. Ponder and reflect to
compare this case to recent news and cases. This is the really cool part. You will be
thinking like a legally astute manager, owner, or professional as you read, analyze and
compare cases to draw your conclusions. Some neat ideas to help with your analysis: If
the outcomes of the recent cases you found are different, can you make sense of the
different outcomes? Are there different legal standards that make for different outcomes?
Is there a trend leaning more in favor of a plaintiff or defendants position? Are the
outcomes the same or different simply because the facts are similar or dissimilar? What
accounts for the same or different results? Write a brief one-paragraph summary of this
case or article and compare and contrast the case in the book to your article or case:

In Home Rentals v. Curtis, the court would have adopted a different ruling if the tenants
were obliged to give the landlord ample time to clean the house prior to abandoning the home.
After going through other related cases, Home Rentals v. Curtis can be compared with Wade v.
Jobe. In Wade v. Jobe, Jobe rented a house from Wade, but shortly after moving into the house,
she found many defects (Casenotes, 2007, p. 18). The basement had sewage which made it

HOME RENTALS CORP. V. CURTIS

difficult for Jobe to reside in the house. The tenant notified Wade that she would no longer pay
rent till the problem was fixed. However, the landlord was unable to repair the defects
permanently and an inspection agency declared the house unfit for human occupancy. The tenant
vacated the home and Wade sued her for the unpaid rent. The trial court awarded rent to the
landlord and the tenant appealed. The case was reopened for reconsideration in the trial court and
to determine whether the landlord breached his responsibilities. The court favored the landlord
since, at that time, it never recognized warranty of habitability in residential houses.

b. Change it up: Pose the question What if the facts were different? Create changes to
the facts that would probably result in a different outcome of the case and, using critical
thinking and legal reasoning, tell why your change in facts would make a difference.
Write your thoughts here:
In the case Home Rentals v. Curtis, if the tenants had vacated the property without
justifiable reasons, the court ruling would have been different. If the condition of the house was
habitable and the tenants vacated without notice, it would have been considered that they
breached the lease agreement. In such a situation, the judgment would have been in favor of the
landlord. In Wade v. Jobe, if the Utah court recognized warranty of habitability in residential
houses, the case would have been ruled in favor of the tenant.
D. Creative, Application and Critical Thinking Questions NOTE: Question 7 is the most
important and counts heavily in grading.
7. Your point of view of the case in the book:
a. Do you agree or disagree with the actual outcome? Why or why not?

HOME RENTALS CORP. V. CURTIS

I do agree with the outcome of the case. The tenants had a justifiable reason to abandon
the lease agreement. They leased a habitable house, only to find it uninhabitable when they went
to move in. The landlord did not offer the tenants with a safe home. It was up to the landlord to
ensure that the premise was clean enough and in the best conditions for occupations. Therefore,
the tenants had no choice but to abandon the home.
b. Relate the case to your own experience, if applicable, or to the experience someone else
has shared with you. IF you do not have an experience to share, discuss how will you apply
the lessons from this case to your future career?
My close friend rented an apartment online in an amusement park. He was to reside in the
apartment for a week, and he paid a deposit equivalent to two days rent. According to the
agreement, he was to pay the remaining amount on arrival. However, upon arrival, he found that
the apartment was dirty, with spiders and mice all over. Upon making inquiries from the
apartment agents, he was requested to check into a different apartment for a day as he waits the
apartment he booked to be cleaned. However, my friend requested back his money since the
alternative apartment was not worth the money he had already deposited or else he would seek
legal assistance. The agents apologized and returned back the deposited money, and my friend
sought tenancy elsewhere. The lessons I learn from my friends experience is that if I am leasing
a property, I would ensure that it meets the best living standards and conditions to avoid
inconveniencing my tenants and thus avoid legal suits based on constructive eviction.
c. Write recommendations to avoid future legal problems and that best suit the objectives
of a firm or company in your chosen career field.

HOME RENTALS CORP. V. CURTIS

Recommendations to avoiding future legal suits are for real estate firms to ensure that
they maintain their properties in the best conditions possible. They can seek assistance from
home maintenance personnel to ensure that their properties are clean and safe for occupancy
before the date a tenant is to move in. Any faulty parts of a home such as faulty drainage
systems, faulty toilets, leaking roofs, and broken doors among other such faults should be
repaired in time. Once a tenant moves in, the landlord should always ensure that he or she
responds promptly to complaints of tenants and attends to them on time. These recommendations
can assist in avoiding future legal suits.

References
Casenotes. (2007). Casenotes Legal Briefs Property. New York: Aspen Publishers.
Gray, R. (2005). The Applicability of Constructive Eviction. The John Marshall Law Review
38(4), 1289-1314.