Expanded Retaliation Defense: A new hurdle to evicting tenants

In recent judicial news, there has been a significant change to landlord-tenant law in Minnesota. Last month the Minnesota Supreme Court in Central Housing Associates, LP v. Olson, issued a ruling creating brand new common law for tenants to utilize in defense of eviction actions.

In this case, the tenant complained to the landlord about maintenance issues, and after he claimed, a maintenance staff member harassed his daughter. Sometime later, the landlord gave the tenant notice that the tenant’s one-year lease would be terminated two months early. The tenant objected to the eviction, claiming the eviction was due to the tenant’s earlier complaints.

Minnesota landlord-tenant law provides tenants with a “retaliation defense.” Minnesota Statutes Section 504B.441 states:

A residential tenant may not be evicted, nor may the residential tenant’s obligations under a lease be increased or the services decreased, if the eviction or increase of obligations or decrease of services is intended as a penalty for the residential tenant’s or housing-related neighborhood organization’s complaint of a violation. The burden of proving otherwise is on the landlord if the eviction or increase of obligations or decrease of services occurs within 90 days after filing the complaint unless the Court finds that the complaint was not made in good faith. After 90 days, the burden of proof is on the residential tenant.

However, as interpreted by the Minnesota Supreme Court in this case, the statutory defense is only available to tenants that make a formal complaint of misconduct against the landlord, such as filing a lawsuit or making a complaint to a housing inspector.

The Court was dissatisfied with the limitations of the statutory retaliation defense and created a new law to fill in the gaps it felt the Legislature unintentionally formed. The new law created by the Court established a common-law retaliation defense for tenants to utilize when they have made complaints to the landlord and not a more formal complaint.

What does this mean for landlords moving forward? It means the potential for an increase in cost and difficulty in evicting tenants. When considering eviction, landlords must now be prepared to defend against any complaints made regarding real or perceived misconduct, regardless of whether those complaints impacted the landlord’s decision to evict the tenant. In short, landlords must now be ready to expend more time, money, and effort to evict tenants.