Summers v. Crestview Apartments, 2010 MT 164 (2010)

Citation: Summers v. Crestview Apartments, 2010 MT 164 (2010)
Parent Document: Summers v. Crestview Apartments, 2010 MT 164 (2010)
Jurisdiction: Montana (state)
Effective Date: 2010-07-27
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/889353/summers-v-crestview-apartments/ ↗

Full Text

824 chars

¶37 We similarly conclude that merely severing the prohibited rental provisions does not address the chilling effect that such provisions could continue to have on the exercise of tenants’ statutory rights if the only consequence to a landlord for using such provisions is that they are found unenforceable by a court. As noted above, the law provides that “the court may refuse to enforce the agreement ... to avoid an unconscionable result.” Section 70-24-404(l)(a), MCA. In this case, to allow Crestview to enforce the rental agreement following inclusion of the accelerated rent and attorney fees provisions, together with Crestview’s illegal deductions of future rent from the security deposit, would lead to an unconscionable result. Consequently, we hold that the entire lease agreement is unenforceable by Crestview.

Other Sections in This Document (530)

Full Text