Sarah B. Kline v. 1500 Massachusetts Avenue Apartment Corporation, 439 F.2d 477 (1970)

Citation: Sarah B. Kline v. 1500 Massachusetts Avenue Apartment Corporation, 439 F.2d 477 (1970)
Parent Document: Sarah B. Kline v. 1500 Massachusetts Avenue Apartment Corporation, 439 F.2d 477 (1970)
Jurisdiction: DC (municipal)
Effective Date: 1970-09-08
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/295292/sarah-b-kline-v-1500-massachuset... ↗

Full Text

1,375 chars

The panel opinion is an excellent argument for a high degree of security in apartments and many of its contentions have considerable weight to them but in my opinion they overstate the security that can reasonably be afforded. The hysteria of apartment dwellers in an inner city plagued with crime8 is understandable but they are not any more exposed there than they are on the streets or in office buildings and they cannot expect the landlord to furnish the equivalent of police protection that is not available from the duly constituted government in the locality.9 In my opinion the decision in Goldberg v. Housing Authority of Newark, 38 N.J. 578, 186 A.2d 291, 10 A.L.R.2d 595 (1962) answers all appellant’s arguments. It is just too much, absent a contractual agreement, to require or expect a combination office-apartment building such as is involved here to provide police patrol protection or its equivalent in the block-long, well-lighted passageways. Yet nothing short of that will meet the second guessing standard of protection the panel opinion practically directs. If tenants expect such protection, they can move to apartments where it is available and presum*493ably pay a higher rental, but it is a mistake in my judgment to hold an office-apartment building to such a requirement when the tenant knew for years that such protection was not being afforded.

Other Sections in This Document (253)

Full Text