HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-6831
BEN HAVENS and ERIN HAVENS,
Plaintiffs
v.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
DENNIS GROCE, KELLY GROCE, and OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
DERIO STOLL,
Defendants 2017-06831 CIVIL TERM
IN RE: COMPLAINT FOR EJECTMENT
OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT
PLACEY, C.P.J., 19 NOVEMBER 2018
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Plaintiffs (Landlords) initiated this landlord-tenant action by filing a
Landlord/Tenant Complaint on June 6, 2017, when Defendants (Tenants) failed to
vacate their apartment at the end of the rental term after receiving notice to quit or pay
rent. A hearing was held on June 15, 2017, before Magisterial District Judge Birbeck,
and all the Tenants were held jointly and severally liable for $6,722.09 for rent and
costs.
Tenants Dennis and Kelly Groce filed notice of appeal, and on July 13, 2017,
Landlords filed a Complaint seeking: (1) ejectment, (2) payment for rent with late fees,
and (3) damages. On September 29, 2017, an Order of Possession was served upon
Tenants. On October 2, 2017, the Prothonotary was ordered to release $2,550.00 from
2017-06831 CIVIL TERM
escrow to Landlords for rent owed. On January 4, 2018, an arbitration panel found in
favor of Landlords. Tenants Groce appealed the arbitration, and the parties filed pretrial
memoranda addressing liability, damages, and attorney fees. A nonjury trial was held
on September 19, 2018. This opinion is in support of the simultaneously filed order
holding Tenants jointly and severally liable for unpaid rent and damage to the property.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
1. This is a landlord-tenant dispute where Landlords seek monetary
damages for unpaid rent and utilities, damages to property, and attorney
fees.
2. Landlords are the owners of a residential apartment building located at
329 N. Hanover Street, Carlisle, Pennsylvania.
3. On May 18, 2014, Landlords entered into a lease agreement with Tenants
Dennis Groce, Kelly Groce, and Dario Stoll.
4. Tenant Dennis Groce was the financially stable applicant per Landlords.
5. The initial lease term ran from June 1, 2015 to May 31, 2016, and
automatically renewed yearly, unless “ management \[is made\] aware of
\[Tenants’\] intent to vacate” at least thirty days in advance. Complaint, filed
July 13, 2017, exhibit A, “Residential Lease/Rental Agreement” at
Paragraph (¶) Term (henceforth “Lease Agreement at ¶ \[title\]”).
6. The Notices clause of the Lease Agreement states: “\[a\]ny notice required
by this agreement shall be in writing and shall be delivered personally or
mailed by registered or certified mail.” Lease Agreement at ¶ Notices.
2
2017-06831 CIVIL TERM
7. Tenants provided Landlords with an $850.00 security deposit as required
by the lease agreement.
8. Sometime during the summer of 2016, Tenant Dennis Groce told
Landlords that he would be vacating the apartment in October 2016, and
moving to a senior living apartment at One West Penn, Carlisle,
Pennsylvania.
9. Around this time Tenant Dennis Groce took Landlord Ben Haven into the
apartment to show him damage caused by Tenant Stoll.
10. On April 29, 2017, Landlords gave notice of their intention not to renew the
lease at the end of its term, May 31, 2017.
11. Tenants failed to vacate the apartment at the end of the rental term and
remained in possession of the premises until October 2017, when
Landlords enforced an order of possession; Tenants failed to pay rent
during this period.
12. Tenant Stoll admitted to intentionally causing damage to the medicine
cabinet, doors, light fixtures, and outlets in the apartment.
13. The only legible receipts presented to the court for the damaged doors
were for replacement door knobs and locks.
DISCUSSION
Statement of Law: The Landlord and Tenant Act of 1951 (“the Act”) is the
applicable law in this matter. 68 P.S. §§ 250.101-399.18. Section 250.201 of the Act
provides that a lease term of three years or less may be completed “by oral or written
contract or agreement.” Id. at 250.101 “\[T\]he law is well settled that a written \[lease\]
3
2017-06831 CIVIL TERM
agreement may be modified by a subsequent (written or) oral agreement and that this
modification may be shown by writings or by words or by conduct or by all three\[.\]”
Bonczek v. Pascoe Equip. Co., 450 A.2d 75, 77 (Pa. Super. 1982)(citing Dora v.
Dora, 141 A.2d 587, 590 (Pa. 1958) and Elliott-Lewis Corp. v. York-Shipley, Inc., 94
A.2d 47 (Pa. 1953)); see also Nitardy v. Chabot, 2018 Pa. Super. 255 (filed Sept. 14,
2018). Further, “\[it\] is well settled that a written agreement can be modified by a
subsequent oral agreement provided the latter is based upon a valid consideration and
is proved by evidence which is clear, precise, and convincing.” Pellegrene v. Luther,
169 A.2d 298, 299 (Pa. 1961).
Where recovery is allowed against more than one person, a defendant’s liability
for actions involving an intentional tort “shall be joint and several and the court shall
enter a joint and several judgment in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant for
the total dollar amount awarded as damages\[.\]” 42 Pa.C.S. § 7102(a.1)(1) and(3).
Further, “\[u\]nder the American Rule, applicable in Pennsylvania, a litigant cannot
recover counsel fees from an adverse party unless there is express statutory
authorization, a clear agreement of the parties, or some other established exception.”
Trizechahn Gateway LLC. v. Titus, 976 A.2d 474, 482-83 (Pa. 2009) (citation
omitted). Contract law is applied for lease agreements and if the agreement is
ambiguous, it is interpreted against the drafter. Ins. Adjustment Bureau, Inc. v.
Allstate Ins. Co., 905 A.2d 462, 468 (Pa. 2006) (citation omitted). The Act does not
provide for recovery of counsel fees, but also does not prohibit such clauses from
leases. Bayne v. Smith, 965 A.2d 265, 267 (Pa. Super. 2009).
4
2017-06831 CIVIL TERM
Application of Law to Facts: Instantly, clear and convincing evidence shows that
despite the written notice requirement in the Lease Agreement, Tenant Dennis Stoll
attempted to modify the lease by oral agreement. Case law allows such modification if
valid consideration is clearly provided. Tenant Dennis Groce verbally informed
Landlords that he would be moving out of the apartment due to health reasons, and
Landlords did not object through words or conduct. Prior to vacating the premises in
October 2016, Tenant Dennis Groce took Landlord to the apartment and indicated
damage attributed to Tenant Stoll. The lease agreement requires “Tenant\[s\] must make
\[Landlords\] aware of their intent to vacate 30 days prior to the end term \[May 31, 2017.\]”
Lease Agreement at ¶ Renewal Term. However, there is no evidence that additional
consideration was provided to complete the modification by oral agreement, and there is
no evidence that Tenant Dennis Groce was removed from the lease; therefore, as
consideration and conduct are lacking, the attempted modification to the lease
agreement fails, and the written lease agreement controls.
The Lease Agreement’s Remedies Cumulative clause is ambiguous as to the
awarding attorney fees. It states: “\[a\]ll remedies under this agreement or by law or
equity shall be cumulative. If a suit for any breach of this agreement establishes a
breach by Resident, Resident shall pay to Management all expenses incurred in
connection therewith.” Lease Agreement at ¶ Remedies Cumulative. Unlike
Trizechahn and Bayne, Landlords in the instant case are not entitled to attorney fees.
There is no indication of an exception to the American Rule of each side paying their
own attorney fees, and because the language of the clause is vague, contract law
dictates the ambiguity is to be interpreted against the drafter.
5
2017-06831 CIVIL TERM
Accordingly, Tenants are jointly and severally liable for five months of unpaid rent
and damage to the apartment. Landlord’s itemized list of repairs and costs exceeds
damage shown to have been caused by Tenants. Furthermore, Landlord’s self-
imposed labor rate of $55.00 per hour, exclusive from an additionally itemized 20%
profit rate applied to total costs (effectively paying himself $66.00 per hour), is excessive
and reduced accordingly. Landlords’ monetary award for damages reflects
compensation for damage to the medicine cabinet, bedroom door, entrance door, light
fixture, and outlets. In total, Landlords are awarded $5,550.96 for rent, utilities, and
property damages. The Tenants are credited with $850.00 for the security deposit and
$2,550.00 from the escrow account. Consequently, Tenants owe $2,150.96.
ORDER OF COURT
th
AND NOW, this 19 day of November 2018, upon completion of a nonjury trial
based upon Plaintiffs’ Complaint, the court finds the Defendants joint and severally
liable for unpaid rent, utilities, and damage to the apartment totaling $5,550.96. The
amount is reduced by the $850.00 security deposit and the $2,550.00 paid from the
escrow account. Defendants are ORDERED to pay Plaintiffs $2,150.96.
By the Court,
________________________
Thomas A. Placey C.P.J.
Distribution List:
Christopher Rice, Esq.
Stacey Wolf, Esq.
6