Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Landlord And Tenant--Leases--Lease Executed In Violation Of District Of Columbia Housing Regulations Is An Illegal Contract--Brown V. Southall Realty Co., Michigan Law Review
Landlord And Tenant--Leases--Lease Executed In Violation Of District Of Columbia Housing Regulations Is An Illegal Contract--Brown V. Southall Realty Co., Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff-landlord brought an action for possession based on nonpayment of rent in the Landlord-Tenant Branch of the District of Columbia Court of General Sessions. Although the parties stipulated at trial that the rent was 230 dollars in arrears, defendant-tenant contended that the plaintiff was not entitled to possession because the lease was an illegal contract under the District of Columbia Housing Regulations. The trial court rejected this contention and gave judgment for plaintiff. By the time her appeal to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals was heard, the tenant had vacated the premises and no longer desired to contest …
Slumlordism As A Tort--A Dissenting View, Walter J. Blum, Allison Dunham
Slumlordism As A Tort--A Dissenting View, Walter J. Blum, Allison Dunham
Michigan Law Review
The persistence of substandard housing in urban centers stands as a challenge to law. There is a pressing need to re-examine whether prevailing legal doctrines are adequate for dealing with the problem and to suggest new doctrines where the old are found wanting. To their great credit, Joseph L. Sax and Fred J. Hiestand in their article "Slumlordism as a Tort" face up to these tasks boldly and vigorously. They conclude that, under existing conditions, it is imprudent to rely on public authorities to enforce housing codes and it is unlikely that legislatures will place sufficient enforcement powers in private …
Slumlordism As A Tort--A Brief Response, Joseph L. Sax
Slumlordism As A Tort--A Brief Response, Joseph L. Sax
Michigan Law Review
Professors Blum and Dunham begin their comment by accusing us of having a new idea. We plead guilty. Our purpose was to demonstrate that accepted principles in analogous areas of law would support a slumlordism action, not to argue that tort law as presently applied would do so. Indeed, our basic intent was to underscore the myopia of existing tort law perspectives.