Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

King v. Moorehead, 495 S.W.2d 65 (1973)

Citation
King v. Moorehead, 495 S.W.2d 65 (1973)
Parent Document
King v. Moorehead, 495 S.W.2d 65 (1973)
Jurisdiction
Missouri (state)
Effective Date
1973-04-02

Other Sections in This Document (163)

Full Text

1,142 chars
Upon this exception was built another exception, the doctrine of constructive eviction. The courts soon came to realize that a tenant's possession and quiet enjoyment could be molested by something less than physical extrusion by the landlord. A constructive eviction arises when the lessor, by wrongful conduct or by the omission of a duty placed upon him in the lease, substantially interferes with the lessee's beneficial enjoyment of the demised premises. Under this doctrine the tenant is allowed to abandon the lease and excuse himself from the obligations of rent because the landlord's conduct, or omission, not only substantially breaches the implied covenant of quiet enjoyment but also "operates to impair the consideration for the lease". Dolph v. Barry, 165 Mo.App. 659, 148 S.W. 196, 198 [3] (1912).[9] Thus, the first remedy created by the courts to insure habitability, and to exonerate the tenant's obligation for rent under a lease for lack of it, was "designed to operate as though there were a substantial breach of a material covenant in a bilateral contract". Lemle v. Breeden, 51 Haw. 426, 462 P.2d 470, 475 [5] (1969).