Retaliatory eviction

For retaliatory evictions in the United Kingdom see Revenge eviction

In American landlord–tenant law, a retaliatory eviction is a substantive defense and affirmative cause of action that can be used by a tenant against a landlord. If a tenant reports sanitary violations or violations of minimum housing standards, the landlord cannot evict the tenant in retaliation.

History

Retaliatory eviction first appeared as a tenant's defense against eviction in Edwards v. Habib, where a tenant was evicted after reporting sanitary code violations. The D.C. Circuit recognized that the eviction was unjustified because it was in retaliation for the reporting of violations.^[1]

As a defense

The defense of retaliatory eviction was first recognized in the D.C. Circuit case Edwards v. Habib.

West Virginia

The case Imperial Colliery Co. v. Fout,^[2] the West Virginia Supreme Court reaffirmed that retaliatory eviction was a valid defense against eviction, but added the condition that the retaliation must be against a tenant's exercise of a right incidental to their tenancy. Therefore, a defense of retaliatory eviction did not exist for a tenant evicted after participating in a labor strike.

California

1942.5 is the California Civil Code that establishes a renters rights and defines a Retaliatory Eviction in the state of California.

As a cause of action

Retaliatory eviction was first recognized as a cause of action in the California case Aweeka v. Bonds.^[3] The case recognized the inequity of forcing the tenant to wait until they were confronted with an unlawful detainer action to bring up retaliatory eviction as a defense.

References

1. Casner, A.J. et al. Cases and Text on Property, Fifth Edition. Aspen Publishers, New York, NY: 2004, p. 504
2. Imperial Colliery Co. v. Fout, 179 W.Va. 776 (1988)
3. Aweeka v. Bonds, 20 Cal.App.3d 278 (1971)