{
  "id": 5652670,
  "name": "Morcelia Building Corporation, Appellee, v. Walter Larson, Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Morcelia Building Corp. v. Larson",
  "decision_date": "1946-10-14",
  "docket_number": "Gen. No. 43,745",
  "first_page": "405",
  "last_page": "408",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "329 Ill. App. 405"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "228 Ill. App. 104",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        3078011
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill-app/228/0104-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "340 Ill. 196",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5247285
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/340/0196-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "63 Ill. 430",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        2612674
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/63/0430-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "35 Ill. 414",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ill.",
      "case_ids": [
        5256707
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ill/35/0414-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 305,
    "char_count": 4494,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.519,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.16397983048432554
    },
    "sha256": "306ab3e997bb1c4c1872661d4bbd13796cb203535adcc882ca4bb12594cd095f",
    "simhash": "1:f5e3c8961ad719d5",
    "word_count": 773
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:01:53.743555+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Morcelia Building Corporation, Appellee, v. Walter Larson, Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Presiding Justice O\u2019Connor\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nPlaintiff brought an action of forcible detainer against defendant to recover possession of \u201cApt. 339, 4047 N. Kenmore Ave.\u201d The basis of plaintiff\u2019s suit was that defendant had refused to pay the rent due November 1,1945, for that month. The case was heard before the court, the parties stipulating the facts; there was a judgment for possession in plaintiff\u2019s favor. Defendant appeals.\nThe record discloses that plaintiff rented defendant an apartment in an apartment building. The apartment was leased on a month to month tenancy and plaintiff was required to maintain the apartment, furnishing \u201call of the necessary carpets, linens, beddings, etc., and maid service as is usual and customary in furnished apartment buildings.\u201d It was stipulated that proper notices had been given to the parties in accordance with the regulations of the Office of Price Administration. That about October 16, 1945, a fire occurred in the apartment, caused considerable damage and \u201crendered the apartment untenantable.\u201d The case was commenced on November 17, 1945 and went to trial January 30, 1946. Prom the time of the fire up to and including the date of the hearing \u201cno repairs were made to the apartment, as a result of which the defendant during the month of\u201d October, 1945, vacated the apartment with the exception\u201d of some of his clothes which were left in one of the closets of the apartment and were there when the action was brought. \u201cThe defendant refused to pay rent for the month of November\u201d contending that no rent was due because the apartment was untenantable and was unoccupied.\nA great many authorities are cited and discussed by counsel for both parties but we think it would serve no useful purpose to discuss or refer to any but a few' of them because the facts in a number of the authorities cited are so different that the law there announced by the courts would be inapplicable to the facts in the case before us.\nIn Bentley v. Sill, 35 Ill. 414, where the premises were rendered unfit for the purpose for which they were rented by the act of an adjoining property owner and the landlord did nothing to remedy the matter, the landlord brought suit for two months\u2019 rent, the court held defendant was \u00abnot liable and said: \u201cWe are satisfied it was the plaintiff\u2019s duty, when Scammon raised his building, to meet the exigency and protect his tenant. The first fault was his, in not doing so; and he ought not to be permitted to recover rent for .the months claimed. This disturbance by Mr. Scammon was equivalent to an eviction, and suspended, to that extent, the payment of the rent.\u201d And in Hayner v. Smith, 63 Ill. 430, it was held that where a lessee is wrongfully evicted by the lessor from a portion of the demised premises he was thereby excused from the payment of rent although he remained in possession of the remaining portion of the premises.\nIn the instant case plaintiff did not evict defendant from the apartment but plaintiff\u2019s refusal to repair the damages caused by the fire kept defendant from occupying it. And we think that the fact that he left some clothes in one of the closets ought not to make any difference. There is no contention that the closet was so damaged by the fire that it could not be used but the rest of the apartment was. In The Automobile Supply Co. v. Scene-in-Action Corp., 340 Ill. 196, it was held that \u201cThe failure of a landlord to furnish heat for the demised premises in accordance with the terms of his covenant in the lease justifies the tenant in removing from the premises, and if he does so he is discharged from the payment of rent thereafter.\u201d To the same effect is Carlson v. Levinson, 228 Ill. App. 104.\nSince the apartment was rendered untenantable by the fire and since plaintiff did nothing to repair the damage so that the tenant might occupy it, we think defendant ought not to be required to- pay rent for the month of November, which was the basis of plaintiff\u2019s action.\nThe judgment of the Municipal court of Chicago is reversed and the cause remanded with directions to dismiss the suit.\nReversed and remanded with directions.\nNiemeyer and Feinberg, JJ., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Presiding Justice O\u2019Connor"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Isaac M. Mills, of Chicago, for appellant.",
      "Martin S. Gordon, of Chicago, for appellee; Harry Shriman, of Chicago, of counsel."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Morcelia Building Corporation, Appellee, v. Walter Larson, Appellant.\nGen. No. 43,745.\nOpinion filed October 14, 1946.\nReleased for publication October 28, 1946.\nIsaac M. Mills, of Chicago, for appellant.\nMartin S. Gordon, of Chicago, for appellee; Harry Shriman, of Chicago, of counsel."
  },
  "file_name": "0405-01",
  "first_page_order": 439,
  "last_page_order": 442
}
