Sample Multiple Choice Questions Landlord / Tenant Law Property II – Prof. Short
PLEASE DO NOT TURN OVER UNTIL INSTRUCTED TO DO SO
1. In July of 2008, Jessica rented a small house. The lease she signed with Elmer, her landlord, contained the following provisions: “Tenant agrees to pay $1,000 rent each month, on the first day of each month, for a term of two (2) years”; “Landlord agrees to furnish and provide electricity to the Tenant”; “Landlord must approve all requested transfers by Tenant in writing, and such approval will not be unreasonably withheld”; and “Tenant agrees to take the property ‘as is’ and specifically waives any and all rights under the implied warranty of habitability.” In late August of 2008, Jessica began having sporadic problems with her electricity. On September 2, 2008, Jessica’s electricity went out completely. She called Elmer from work the next day and asked that he please fix the problem. Elmer agreed that he would, but he never did. On September 16, 2008, after several more phone calls to Elmer and still suffering with no electricity, Jessica comes to your office for legal advice. Which of the following is most likely true? (A) (B) (C) (D)
(E)
Jessica can legally stop paying rent, but only if she moves out first under the doctrine of constructive eviction. Jessica can legally stop paying rent and remain in possession. Jessica has no valid legal claim regarding habitability against Elmer since she explicitly waived any possible claims in her lease. Jessica can sue Elmer to recover the difference between the house as warranted under the implied warranty of habitability minus the actual value of the house without electricity, but only if she first mitigates damages. None of the above is true.
2. Leticia, who owned a large apartment building, rented out Apartment #8 to Abby for a term of five years, to end on December 31, 2011. The head lease contained no language limiting Abby’s right to sublease or assign. After three months of living in Apartment #8, Abby transferred all of her rights to Bessie, who agreed to pay rent to Abby and remain in possession until December 31, 2011. Abby planned to pay rent to Leticia out of the money paid to her by Bessie. Six months later, Bessie conveyed the tenancy to Cassie. Cassie (1) agreed to pay rent directly to Leticia; (2) agreed to be bound by the terms of the head lease; and (3) agreed to remain in possession and pay rent until December 31, 2011. After Cassie went into possession, she paid rent directly to Leticia (at which point, Abby stopped paying rent to Leticia). On December 12, 2008, Cassie transferred the tenancy to Delilah until December 31, 2011, under the agreement that Delilah would pay rent to Abby. After Delilah went into possession, she paid rent to Abby, and Abby then paid rent to Leticia. Five months later, Delilah stopped paying rent to Abby, and Abby stopped paying rent to Leticia. Leticia is now considering lawsuits against everyone involved. Against whom would she likely be successful?
(A) (B) (C) (D) (E)
Only Abby, since Abby is the only person in privity of contract with Leticia. Only Abby and Cassie, since they are the only persons in privity of contract with Leticia. Only Delilah, since only Delilah breached her promise to pay rent. Abby, Bessie, Cassie, or Delilah, since Leticia has privity of estate and/or privity of contract with each of them. Only Abby, Cassie, or Delilah, since Leticia has privity of estate and/or privity of contract with each of them.