Martin v. Springdale Stores, Inc.
Decision Date | 04 January 1978 |
Citation | 354 So.2d 1144 |
Parties | David L. MARTIN v. SPRINGDALE STORES, INC. Civ. 1279. |
Court | Alabama Court of Civil Appeals |
Joseph J. Boswell, Mobile, for appellant.
Geary A. Gaston, Mobile, for appellee.
This is an appeal by appellant-plaintiff from an order of the Circuit Court of Mobile County granting appellee-defendant's motion to dismiss plaintiff's claim. The trial court's order was bottomed on the premise that appellant's claim for damages for the breach of implied warranties failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted under Alabama law.
The dispositive issue in this case is whether there is an implied warranty of habitability and fitness made by a lessor-landlord to a lessee-tenant by the act of renting residential property. If there is no such implied warranty, the trial court did not err in granting appellee's motion to dismiss.
The pertinent undisputed facts, as shown by the record and briefs filed with this court, reveal the following:
Appellant-plaintiff rented an apartment from the appellee-landlord and entered into a written residential lease agreement covering the period from May 1, 1974, to April 30, 1975. Pertinent parts of this lease, dealing with the question of responsibility for damage to personal property and the responsibility for the condition of the premises, are set out below:
After living in the leased premises for approximately four months, the appellant's utility bill increased considerably. Appellant contacted appellee's agent and complained of such increase. Appellant was referred to Alabama Power Company who checked and confirmed that appellant's bill and meter were correct. Approximately twelve days later, on September 22, 1974, a fire occurred in appellant's apartment.
As a result of the apartment being damaged, appellee made another apartment available to appellant.
Appellant filed a one-count complaint alleging that appellant impliedly warranted the habitability of the leased apartment. Appellant further alleged the warranty was breached in that the apartment was not habitable due to defective electrical wiring and that this rendered the apartment unreasonably dangerous. Appellant then demanded judgment in the sum of $2,500 for damages suffered as a result of the fire. Upon motion by appellee, the trial court dismissed appellant's complaint on the basis that it failed to state a claim under Alabama law. Appellant appeals that order.
As noted above, the dispositive issue in this case is whether the warranty of habitability applies to the rental of residential property.
This court has recognized and adopted the principle of an implied warranty of fitness and habitability for...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
KITCHENS BY AND THROUGH KITCHENS v. United States
...Unlike many states, Alabama recognizes no implied warranty of habitability in residential leases. Martin v. Springdale Stores, Inc., 354 So.2d 1144, 1145-46 (Ala.Civ.App.1978). Thus, a landlord is responsible for defects in the premises only in limited circumstances. One is with hidden defe......
-
Knight v. Knight
...garnishment since the underlying judgment was ex delicto. This court is bound by prior decisions of our supreme court. Martin v. Springdale Stores, Inc., 354 So.2d 1144, cert. denied, 354 So.2d 1146 Appellant's second contention is that the distinction between ex contractu and ex delicto ju......
- Cheatham v. Cheatham
- Ex parte Nelson.