Applebaum v. Kidwell
| Decision Date | 03 May 1926 |
| Docket Number | No. 4358.,4358. |
| Citation | 12 F.2d 846 |
| Parties | APPLEBAUM et al. v. KIDWELL. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit |
M. F. Bischoff, Robert Hardison, and Campbell Howard, all of Washington, D. C., for plaintiffs in error.
G. E. Sullivan, of Washington, D. C., for defendant in error.
Before MARTIN, Chief Justice, VAN ORSDEL, Associate Justice, and BARBER, Judge of the United States Court of Customs Appeals.
The case is here on a writ of error to the municipal court of the District to review its judgment sustaining a demurrer to the declaration.
Stripped of verbiage, the declaration alleges: "That defendant leased a room to plaintiffs, which was separated from an adjoining room controlled by defendant by a partition so constructed as to be somewhat unsubstantial, of which latter fact plaintiffs were ignorant, and were not informed by defendant, although he knew how the partition was constructed; that, defendant's room becoming vacant, he permitted the outside doors thereof to become and remain unfastened, and the exposed face of the partition in the vacant room to get into a condition that revealed its character, all without the knowledge of plaintiffs; that thieves, tempted and their action made possible by these conditions, forced an entrance from the vacant room through said partition, and stole and carried away plaintiffs' goods to the value of $1,000, which plaintiffs seek to recover in this action."
It is not claimed that defendant ever agreed to be responsible for any such loss or damage, and it is admitted "that there is no implied warranty in the letting of a house that it is safe and fit for occupation." In effect, plaintiffs contend that defendant was under legal obligations to them to keep in sufficient repair those parts of the premises under his control, and not in the possession or control of the plaintiffs, to prevent burglarizing the same. This doctrine would require a landlord at his peril to always keep his leased premises in such a condition that law-breakers could not enter same and commit crime. It would establish that in leasing property it must always be presumed that a trespass or crime may be committed thereon, and that the landlord owes the duty of protecting his tenant against the same.
As we understand the law, a landlord is not liable to his tenants for interference by third persons with the tenant's possession and business, when no wrongful act of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kline v. 1500 Massachusetts Avenue Apartment Corp.
...the street level except by the hallways. 5 Kendall v. Gore Properties, 98 U.S.App. D.C. 378, 236 F.2d 673 (1956). 6 Applebaum v. Kidwell, 56 App.D.C. 311, 12 F.2d 846 (1926); Goldberg v. Housing Authority of Newark, 38 N.J. 578, 186 A.2d 291, 10 A.L.R.3d 595 (1962); but see Ramsay v. Morris......
-
Gulf Reston, Inc. v. Rogers
...A.2d 291, 10 A.L.R.3d 595 (1962); Trice v. Chicago Housing Authority, 14 Ill.App.3d 97, 302 N.E.2d 207 (1973); 2 Applebaum v. Kidwell, 56 U.S.App.D.C. 311, 12 F.2d 846 (1926). Cf. Kline v. 1500 Mass. Ave. Apt. Corp., 141 U.S.App.D.C. 370, 439 F.2d 477, 481, 43 A.L.R.3d 311, 315 Restatement ......
-
Rittenberg v. Donohoe Const. Co., Inc.
...by third persons with the tenant's possession, absent any wrongful acts or omissions by the landlord. Appelebaum v. Kidwell, 56 App.D.C. 311, 312, 12 F.2d 846, 847 (1926). There is an allegation in the complaint that WGMS misrepresented the nature of its interest in the leased property. The......
-
Sarbov Parking Corp. v. Motors Insurance Corp.
...a tenant's property from criminal acts of third persons. Ramsay v. Morrissette, D.C.App., 252 A.2d 509 (1969); Applebaum v. Kidwell, 56 App. D.C. 311, 12 F.2d 846 (1926). This rule not invariable, however. Cf. Kendall v. Gore Properties, Inc., 98 U.S.App.D.C. 378, 236 F.2d 673 (1956) and Ra......