Alaska Statutes
Alaska Stat. § 34.03.190 (2026)
Landlord's noncompliance as defense to action for possession or rent
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AK-LEGakleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 34.03.190. Landlord's noncompliance as defense to action for possession or rent.
(a) In an action for possession based upon nonpayment of the rent or in an action for rent when the tenant is in possession, the tenant may counterclaim for any amount recoverable under the rental agreement or this chapter. If a counterclaim is made, the court shall determine whether the defense is supported by the evidence and, if so, may order that
(1) the periodic rent is to be reduced to reflect the diminution in value of the dwelling unit during the period of noncompliance;
(2) the action be continued for a reasonable time to enable the landlord to cure the violation;
(3) the tenant pay into court all or part of the rent accrued and thereafter accruing; if the violations have not been cured within six months, the court shall enter judgment for the defendant and either refund to the defendant all money deposited or use the money for the purpose of making the dwelling fit for human habitation; if the violations have been cured, the court shall determine the amount due to each party; the party to whom a net amount is owed shall be paid first from the money paid into the court, and the balance by the other party; if no rent remains due after application of this section, judgment shall be entered for the tenant in the action for possession;
(4) the tenant vacate the dwelling during the making of necessary repairs, when the repairs cannot be made without vacation of the premises, the tenant to be reinstated upon completion of the repairs.
(b) In an action for rent where the tenant is not in possession, the tenant may counterclaim as provided in (a) of this section but the tenant is not required to pay rent into court.
(a) In an action for possession based upon nonpayment of the rent or in an action for rent when the tenant is in possession, the tenant may counterclaim for any amount recoverable under the rental agreement or this chapter. If a counterclaim is made, the court shall determine whether the defense is supported by the evidence and, if so, may order that
(1) the periodic rent is to be reduced to reflect the diminution in value of the dwelling unit during the period of noncompliance;
(2) the action be continued for a reasonable time to enable the landlord to cure the violation;
(3) the tenant pay into court all or part of the rent accrued and thereafter accruing; if the violations have not been cured within six months, the court shall enter judgment for the defendant and either refund to the defendant all money deposited or use the money for the purpose of making the dwelling fit for human habitation; if the violations have been cured, the court shall determine the amount due to each party; the party to whom a net amount is owed shall be paid first from the money paid into the court, and the balance by the other party; if no rent remains due after application of this section, judgment shall be entered for the tenant in the action for possession;
(4) the tenant vacate the dwelling during the making of necessary repairs, when the repairs cannot be made without vacation of the premises, the tenant to be reinstated upon completion of the repairs.
(b) In an action for rent where the tenant is not in possession, the tenant may counterclaim as provided in (a) of this section but the tenant is not required to pay rent into court.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1993–2024 · leading case: Vinson v. Hamilton, 854 P.2d 733 (Alaska 1993).
Vinson v. Hamilton, 854 P.2d 733 (Alaska 1993). “See AS 34.03.190. [8] Vinson also argues that by denying him a continuance, despite his willingness to post an undertaking, Judge Wolverton denied him the opportunity to conduct discovery, and denied him due process of law.”
Tuyen Dinh v. Matthew Raines & Melissa Clayton, 544 P.3d 1156 (Alaska 2024). “diminished by the rent that was not paid” pursuant to AS 34.03.190. The superior court found Dinh knew his employees were using Clayton and Raines’s electricity and hot water, and Dinh “had complete control over the premises” but had not stopped the interference, thus making him…”
Tammie Guilford v. Weidner Inv. Servs., Inc., Weidner Inv. Servs., Inc. v. Tammie Guilford, 522 P.3d 1085 (Alaska 2023). “The legislature also used diminution in value in AS 34.03.190, which authorizes the court to abate rent when the tenant asserts a habitability counterclaim to an FED action based on nonpayment of rent.”
DeNardo v. Corneloup, 163 P.3d 956 (Alaska 2007). “AS 34.03.190(a)(1). 42 . Jourdan v. Nationsbanc Mortgage Corp.”
Chilton-Wren v. Olds, 1 P.3d 693 (Alaska 2000). “11 ("Notably, AS 34.03.190(a) does not require tenants to pursue counterclaims by way of an FED hearing.”
— Alaska Stat. § 34.03.190(a) — 3 cases
Vinson v. Hamilton, 854 P.2d 733 (Alaska 1993). “See AS 34.03.190. [8] Vinson also argues that by denying him a continuance, despite his willingness to post an undertaking, Judge Wolverton denied him the opportunity to conduct discovery, and denied him due process of law.”
Tuyen Dinh v. Matthew Raines & Melissa Clayton, 544 P.3d 1156 (Alaska 2024). “diminished by the rent that was not paid” pursuant to AS 34.03.190. The superior court found Dinh knew his employees were using Clayton and Raines’s electricity and hot water, and Dinh “had complete control over the premises” but had not stopped the interference, thus making him…”
Chilton-Wren v. Olds, 1 P.3d 693 (Alaska 2000). “11 ("Notably, AS 34.03.190(a) does not require tenants to pursue counterclaims by way of an FED hearing.”
— Alaska Stat. § 34.03.190(a)(1) — 2 cases
DeNardo v. Corneloup, 163 P.3d 956 (Alaska 2007). “AS 34.03.190(a)(1). 42 . Jourdan v. Nationsbanc Mortgage Corp.”
Chilton-Wren v. Olds, 1 P.3d 693 (Alaska 2000). “11 ("Notably, AS 34.03.190(a) does not require tenants to pursue counterclaims by way of an FED hearing.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.