Errico v. LaMountain, 713 A.2d 791 (1998)

Citation: Errico v. LaMountain, 713 A.2d 791 (1998)
Parent Document: Errico v. LaMountain, 713 A.2d 791 (1998)
Jurisdiction: Rhode Island (state)
Effective Date: 1998-06-19
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1902441/errico-v-lamountain/ ↗

Full Text

795 chars

538 A.2d 1015, 1016 (R.I.1988). The defendants urge that their conduct in this case was “clearly governed” by this line of authority and that application of the common-law rule should have shielded them from any liability. They further claim that their lease agreement with Errico contained no express covenant to repair, that there was insufficient evidence of a defect in the balcony railing or, if the railing was defective, the defect was latent and they were unaware of any railing problem when they entered into the lease with Errico. For the reasons explained below, defendants’ reliance on the common-law rule is misplaced because it no longer serves to immunize residential landlords from liability for their failure to put and keep the leased premises in a fit and habitable condition.

Other Sections in This Document (47)

Full Text