...Wrongful Eviction & Suit for the life of our lease

Submitted by Alisha Romans on

Jurisdiction: 

Area of Law: 

Question: 

We entered into contract to rent a mobile home with an agreement to provide labor to repair a mold issue. We were told in the initial walk through that issue was in 1 bathroom and in a kitchen cabinet connected to the molded area. After we moved in we realized the problem was much worse than initially expected since it was also in the 2nd bathroom and the 2nd bedroom. A materials list was discussed but the materials were never provided. In an addendum it is stated that rent is to be temporarily wuth held until the issue was fixed. We have still not recieved materials and were recently told that it was our responsibility. We came to a verbal agreement to leave the premises by the 1st of June. After this agreement was made we were approached again asking for our mailbox key. I was waiting for my check to come and refused. The day after we were given a notice of eviction for failure to pay rent. Then 3 days later served with papers that we were being sued for life of the lease and damages. Since the lawsuit was filed our application for another apartment was denied. Was it legal for them to file this suit while we are still present in the residence and have yet been heard in court for the eviction? Also is it legal for them to video record our interactions in my residence without permission and is it possible to ask to view these recordings as they support our case? Is there any recourse action that I can take? Can I counter sue?

Selected Answer: 

DakotaLegal's picture

 

Submitted by DakotaLegal on

 
You have several reasons to countersue the landlord, from breach of contract to a possible invasion of your privacy. All of these claims should be in a single court except for an invasion of privacy suit. So we can move away from one issue you raised, pretty quickly, and that’s whether they could sue for a second cause in another court. It’s technically legal for the landlord to sue the way they did (in two separate actions)…but it’s also unusual, and very inefficient, since the same issues (claims, facts, defenses, counter-claims) are going to come into play in both cases. The trick is for you to ask for dismissal of the second suit on the grounds of duplication. It’s going to be much simpler for the landlord/owner to be forced to consolidate these claims if they were both filed in the same court.
 
Because dismissals and court procedures are where many cases are won and lost, I strongly suggest you try to get affordable legal help. You can ask for “sliding scale” legal help in at least two places: first, try here: http://www.sclegal.org/.You should get legal help to ask the second claim be dismissed. A second place to try for affordable legal help is through the South Carolina Bar’s pro Bono program… http://www.scbar.org/Member Resources /ProBonoProgram.aspx.
 
Among the ways to avoid the second suit is for you to plead collateral estoppel. This is a legal doctrine, and it backs up exactly what your instincts told you about having two law suits on the same basic issues. Courts don’t want to have one case cut up into small pieces any more than you do. Here’s a link, explaining where collateral estoppel or res judicata limits “duplicate” types of claims or suits… http://legal-dictionary.the freedictionary.com/Collateral+Estoppel.
 
There are always some problems with “addenda” to a contact. Most contracts, for example, exclude other agreements. Courts often have reason, however, to apply the addendum. If here was separate consideration, for example…here, you said rent could be withheld until the conditions were fixed. Also, there are separate protections that could have made the premises unfit to rent at the start of the lease (making the addendum irrelevant). This is called a breach of the “warranty of habitability.” Here’s a place to find South Carolina’s rules on rental habitability: http://www.uniformlaws.org/shared/docs/ residential %20landlord%20and%20tenant/urlta_memo_warrantyofhabitability_ 021212.pdf. Mold remediation can be one such possible condition of un-habitability. If you can get an expert or your own doctor to describe the danger to your health, good: here’s a case where mold remediation led to a variety of legal claims in addition to the landlord’s breach of contract: http://law.justia.com/cases /south-carolina/court-of-appeals/2007/4204.html. The other causes of action include Negligence, which is called a tort, since the mold may have harmed you physically.
 
 
Another Tort: Invasion Of Privacy
 
It’s highly unusual for someone to videotape a commercial transaction. South Carolina has a State Constitutional right to “privacy” (since 1971) and in 2010 also passed rules restricting non-consensual taping or recording. South Carolina Law 17-30-20, http://www.sc statehouse.gov/code/t17c030.php. Most of South Carolina’s rules have had to do with criminal conduct, such as using tapes for prurient interests: http://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/martin-l-a-os-9212-3-11-11-sc-voyeurism-statute1.pdf. When you say “without your consent,” there’s a question of how you learned of the taping and what it’s possible use could be. Can your consent be implied by later conduct, and what did you do when you do when you learned of the taping?

All Comments

DakotaLegal's picture

 

Submitted by DakotaLegal on

 
You have several reasons to countersue the landlord, from breach of contract to a possible invasion of your privacy. All of these claims should be in a single court except for an invasion of privacy suit. So we can move away from one issue you raised, pretty quickly, and that’s whether they could sue for a second cause in another court. It’s technically legal for the landlord to sue the way they did (in two separate actions)…but it’s also unusual, and very inefficient, since the same issues (claims, facts, defenses, counter-claims) are going to come into play in both cases. The trick is for you to ask for dismissal of the second suit on the grounds of duplication. It’s going to be much simpler for the landlord/owner to be forced to consolidate these claims if they were both filed in the same court.
 
Because dismissals and court procedures are where many cases are won and lost, I strongly suggest you try to get affordable legal help. You can ask for “sliding scale” legal help in at least two places: first, try here: http://www.sclegal.org/.You should get legal help to ask the second claim be dismissed. A second place to try for affordable legal help is through the South Carolina Bar’s pro Bono program… http://www.scbar.org/Member Resources /ProBonoProgram.aspx.
 
Among the ways to avoid the second suit is for you to plead collateral estoppel. This is a legal doctrine, and it backs up exactly what your instincts told you about having two law suits on the same basic issues. Courts don’t want to have one case cut up into small pieces any more than you do. Here’s a link, explaining where collateral estoppel or res judicata limits “duplicate” types of claims or suits… http://legal-dictionary.the freedictionary.com/Collateral+Estoppel.
 
There are always some problems with “addenda” to a contact. Most contracts, for example, exclude other agreements. Courts often have reason, however, to apply the addendum. If here was separate consideration, for example…here, you said rent could be withheld until the conditions were fixed. Also, there are separate protections that could have made the premises unfit to rent at the start of the lease (making the addendum irrelevant). This is called a breach of the “warranty of habitability.” Here’s a place to find South Carolina’s rules on rental habitability: http://www.uniformlaws.org/shared/docs/ residential %20landlord%20and%20tenant/urlta_memo_warrantyofhabitability_ 021212.pdf. Mold remediation can be one such possible condition of un-habitability. If you can get an expert or your own doctor to describe the danger to your health, good: here’s a case where mold remediation led to a variety of legal claims in addition to the landlord’s breach of contract: http://law.justia.com/cases /south-carolina/court-of-appeals/2007/4204.html. The other causes of action include Negligence, which is called a tort, since the mold may have harmed you physically.
 
 
Another Tort: Invasion Of Privacy
 
It’s highly unusual for someone to videotape a commercial transaction. South Carolina has a State Constitutional right to “privacy” (since 1971) and in 2010 also passed rules restricting non-consensual taping or recording. South Carolina Law 17-30-20, http://www.sc statehouse.gov/code/t17c030.php. Most of South Carolina’s rules have had to do with criminal conduct, such as using tapes for prurient interests: http://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/martin-l-a-os-9212-3-11-11-sc-voyeurism-statute1.pdf. When you say “without your consent,” there’s a question of how you learned of the taping and what it’s possible use could be. Can your consent be implied by later conduct, and what did you do when you do when you learned of the taping?