Court reviews whether a landlord can be held in contempt for the actions of its tenant

SMITH COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION v. CARVER TRUCKING, INC. (Tenn. Ct. App. July 12, 2012)

This appeal involves a contempt finding against a closely-held corporation. The defendant closely-held corporation owned real property located on a highway.

The trial court held that the corporation had violated zoning ordinances by maintaining and operating a trucking terminal and salvage yard in an unauthorized area. The trial court enjoined the corporation from maintaining a trucking terminal at this location and directed the corporation to remove junk from the property. The corporation then leased the property to a business associate who continued to operate a trucking terminal on the property and failed to remove the junk. A contempt petition was filed against the defendant corporation.

The trial court determined that the defendant corporation had violated the injunction and was in contempt of court. The defendant corporation now appeals, arguing that the corporation cannot be held in contempt for the actions of the tenant on the property. We affirm.

Opinion available at:
https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/smithplanning_071212.pdf

Court reviews a breach of contract claim against a landlord

JOHN RUFF v. REDDOCH MANAGEMENT, LLC, ET AL. (Tenn. Ct. App. December 1, 2011)

Tenant filed suit against his former landlord and the current owner of premises that tenant leased alleging, inter alia, breach of contract and violations of the Uniform Residential Landlord and Tenant Act. Trial court dismissed tenant's claim against the former landlord holding that the landlord was exempt from suit pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. section 66-28-305. The court dismissed the claim against the current owner because tenant failed to comply with the fourteen day pre-suit notice requirement at Tenn. Code Ann. section 66-28-501(a). Finding no error, we affirm the trial court.

Opinion available at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2011/ruffj_120111.pdf

Court reviews whether a landlord had a duty under a commercial lease to repair a tenant's leaky roof

C.F. PROPERTY, LLC v. RACHEL SCOTT ET AL. (Tenn. Ct. App. September 27, 2011)

This is a landlord-tenant dispute involving commercial property with a known and disclosed "leaky roof." The lease states that the "property" is leased "as is where is." In an email sent prior to the execution of the lease, the landlord stated it would "talk about" repairing the roof after the first year. The leakage increased dramatically after the first year. The tenant began withholding rent.

The landlord filed an unlawful detainer action and the tenant filed a counterclaim for damages resulting from the leaky roof. A bench trial ensured. The court held that, by telling the tenant it would "talk about" repairing the roof, the landlord misrepresented that the roof was repairable when the landlord knew it could not be repaired, and that the landlord had a duty under the lease to repair the roof. The landlord appeals. We reverse the judgment and remand for a determination of the damages due the landlord under the lease.

Opinion available at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2011/CFProperty_092711.pdf