About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

Case Citations [i] (July 2016 through April 2017)

handle is hein.ali/resdplltnt0030 and id is 1 raw text is: 





       PROPERTY 2D: LANDLORD AND TENANT





             PART   I. CREATION   OF  THE  LANDLORD-TENANT RELATIONSHIP

     CHAPTER 1. NATURE AND DURATION OF LANDLORD-TENANT RELATIONSHIP

  § 1.2 Requirement That Right to Possession Be Transferred

  Colo.App.2015. Com. (a) cit. but dist. Cyclist brought a claim pursuant to Colorado's premises-liability
  act, inter alia, against sheep ranchers who held a grazing permit for land on which cyclist was injured,
  alleging that she sustained injuries when she was attacked by defendants' control dogs; defendants filed
  a motion for a determination of a question of law, asking the court to determine the duty of care owed to
  plaintiff. The trial court ruled that plaintiff was a trespasser. Reversing on interlocutory appeal, this court
  held that plaintiff was a licensee, not a trespasser, because a grazing permit did not grant defendants the
  right to exclude others from the property. The court cited Restatement Second of Property: Landlord and
  Tenant § 1.2, Comment a, in distinguishing the right of a leaseholder to have control over property and
  the power to exclude others from the property. Legro v. Robinson, 369 P.3d 785, 790.

  Minn.2016. Cit. in sup. Tenant who provided landlord a security deposit and first month's rent pursuant
  to an alleged oral lease agreement filed an unlawful-exclusion petition against landlord, alleging that
  defendant unlawfully excluded plaintiff from the premises by refusing to allow her to move into the
  premises. The trial court granted defendant's motion to dismiss; the court of appeals affirmed. This court
  reversed and remanded, holding that a person was not required to physically occupy a dwelling to
  qualify as a residential tenant under Minnesota's unlawful-exclusion-or removal statute. The court
  determined that the statute's requirement that a person be occupying the leased premises included the
  present right to occupy the premises, and reasoned, citing Restatement Second of Property: Landlord
  and Tenant §§ 1.2 and 2.1, that, under common law, creation of a landlord-tenant relationship only
  required that the right to present possession of the premises be transferred, which included the right to
  exclude others. Cocchiarella v. Driggs, 884 N.W.2d 621, 626, 627.



     CHAPTER 2.   FORMALITIES REQUIRED FOR CREATION OF LANDLORD-TENANT
                                        RELATIONSHIP

  § 2.1 Oral Lease

  Minn.2016. Cit. in sup. Tenant who provided landlord a security deposit and first month's rent pursuant
  to an alleged oral lease agreement filed an unlawful-exclusion petition against landlord, alleging that
  defendant unlawfully excluded plaintiff from the premises by refusing to allow her to move into the
  premises. The trial court granted defendant's motion to dismiss; the court of appeals affirmed. This court
  reversed and remanded, holding that a person was not required to physically occupy a dwelling to




I  LI       For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most