Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Citation
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Parent Document
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Jurisdiction
- Minnesota (state)
- Effective Date
- 2019-03-06
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/8286581/ellis-v-doe/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (45)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Ellis v. Doe, 924 N.W.2d 258 (2019)
- Section 645
- Section 645
- Section 645
- Section 645
- Section 645
Full Text
845 charsThe Fritz court itself, however, differentiated between a tenant's defense to a landlord's eviction action and a tenant's own action for breach of the covenants, calling them "alternative remedies" available to enforce the covenants. 213 N.W.2d at 341. And the "additional rules" that the Fritz court suggested may be necessary were in the context of a footnote discussion of the procedure for depositing rent payments with the court. Id. at 343 n.5. The Fritz court did not suggest additional rules to limit the options tenants may pursue to address violations of the covenants of habitability. This context, along with the specific language of *265section 504B.385, subdivision 11, that the rent-escrow action does not limit other rights or remedies, make Ellis's argument regarding the Fritz court's anticipation of codification unpersuasive.