Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Houle v. Quenneville, 787 A.2d 1258 (2001)

Citation
Houle v. Quenneville, 787 A.2d 1258 (2001)
Parent Document
Houle v. Quenneville, 787 A.2d 1258 (2001)
Jurisdiction
Vermont (state)
Effective Date
2001-11-09

Other Sections in This Document (112)

Full Text

795 chars
Here, however, the alleged retaliatory action which precipitated the defense is the notice of nonrenewal which was served during the initial term. At that time, tenants were not holdovers, but were holding pursuant to a valid lease. Accordingly, tenants still qualified as tenants, see 9 V.S.A. § 4451(9) ("`Tenant' means a person entitled under a rental agreement to occupy a residential dwelling unit to the exclusion of others"), and were eligible to assert the retaliatory eviction defense. The protected activity, or complaints regarding the condition and safety of the premises and contacting the city housing inspector, likewise occurred during the initial term. Under the Vermont statute, landlords could not threaten an action as a reprisal for this protected activity. 9 V.S.A. § 4465.