Origin of section.

- Statute introduced a new rule on the subject of keeping rented premises in repair, devolving the burden on the landlord instead of upon the tenant, since it rested by the rule of the common law. Vason v. City of Augusta, 38 Ga. 542 (1868); Center & Treadwell v. Davis, 39 Ga. 210 (1869); Whittle v. Webster, 55 Ga. 180 (1875); Driver v. Maxwell, 56 Ga. 11 (1876); Roach v. LeGree, 18 Ga. App. 250, 89 S.E. 167 (1916); Finley v. Williams, 45 Ga. App. 863, 166 S.E. 265 (1932); Wallace v. Adams, 47 Ga. App. 144, 169 S.E. 852 (1933) (see O.C.G.A. § 44-7-13).

Public policy.

- General Assembly has consistently expressed the public policy of this state as one in favor of imposing upon the landlord liability for damages to others from defective construction and failure to keep one's premises in repair. The expressed public policy in favor of landlord liability is matched by an equally strong and important public policy in favor of preventing unsafe residential housing. Thompson v. Crownover, 259 Ga. 126, 381 S.E.2d 283 (1989).

Section does not impose tort liability on landlord.

- Clear import of O.C.G.A. § 44-7-13 is that the landlord is liable for the payment of costs for repairs or improvements made to the property by the tenant. It thus imposes contractual, but not tort, liability on a landlord. Colquitt v. Rowland, 265 Ga. 905, 463 S.E.2d 491 (1995).

O.C.G.A. § 44-7-13 provided remedy to member of military and spouse, who lived in military base housing, and recovery was not barred under the "activity incident to service" doctrine. Elliott ex rel. Elliott v. United States, 877 F. Supp. 1569 (M.D. Ga. 1992), aff'd, 13 F.3d 1555 (11th Cir. 1995).

Proximate cause of injury.

- In order to recover, a tenant is required to show not only that the landlord breached the landlord's statutory duty to keep the premises in repair, but that such breach was the proximate cause of the tenant's injury. Brown v. RFC Mgt., Inc., 189 Ga. App. 603, 376 S.E.2d 691 (1988); Jones v. Campbell, 198 Ga. App. 83, 400 S.E.2d 364 (1990).

Section applies when no estate for years.

- Statute expresses the general rule as to the obligation of a landlord when there is no tenancy for years. Shippen v. Georgia Better Foods, Inc., 79 Ga. App. 813, 54 S.E.2d 704 (1949) (see O.C.G.A. § 44-7-13).

Word "repair" contemplates an existing structure or thing which has become imperfect, and means to supply in the original existing structure that which is lost or destroyed, and thereby restore it to the condition in which it originally existed, as near as may be. Childers v. Speer, 63 Ga. App. 848, 12 S.E.2d 439 (1940).

Any upkeep necessary to preserve premises as to tenantability is a repair.

- Any upkeep, including, if necessary, an entire replacement of a component part of a building upon the rented premises - as, for instance, a furnace - which is necessary to the preservation of the premises in their entirety in the same condition as to tenantability as they were at the time of the execution of the lease, is a repair. Pharr v. Burnette, 158 Ga. App. 473, 280 S.E.2d 881 (1981).

O.C.G.A. § 25-2-40 controlled over O.C.G.A. § 44-7-13. - Summary judgment was properly entered for a landlord and a property manager (appellees) in a negligence suit filed by an injured party as appellees complied with state law as to the installation of smoke detectors contained in O.C.G.A. § 25-2-40(a)(2), and as evidence of any failure to maintain the detectors was inadmissible under § 25-2-40(g); as § 25-2-40(a)(2) was more specific, it governed over any conflicting statutory or common law duty of care, such as those contained in O.C.G.A. §§ 44-7-13 and51-3-1, and as O.C.G.A. § 25-2-40(g) was enacted more recently than the older statutes, it controlled. Hill v. Tschannen, 264 Ga. App. 288, 590 S.E.2d 133 (2003).

Implied covenant of suitability.

- Except as provided by this statute there is no implied covenant that the premises are suitable for the purpose for which the premises are leased, or for the particular use for which the premises are intended by the tenant. Cox v. Walter M. Lowney Co., 35 Ga. App. 51, 132 S.E. 257 (1926); Childers v. Speer, 63 Ga. App. 848, 12 S.E.2d 439 (1940); Point Apts., Inc. v. Bryant, 99 Ga. App. 110, 107 S.E.2d 684 (1959) (see O.C.G.A. § 44-7-13).

Suitability for intended use.

- From former Code 1933, §§ 61-111 and 61-112 (see O.C.G.A. §§ 44-7-13 and 44-7-14) has been derived the principle that suitability for the use "intended by the lessee and known to the lessor" was assured. Thus, a jury question existed as to the suitability of a lock to prevent burglaries. Warner v. Arnold, 133 Ga. App. 174, 210 S.E.2d 350 (1974).

Remedy of tenant when landlord fails to keep premises in repair.

- When a landlord covenants to keep premises in repair, the landlord's failure to do so, whereby the use of the premises by the tenant is impaired, will not work a forfeiture of the rent, unless the premises become untenantable and a constructive eviction results; the remedy of the tenant is, after reasonable opportunity to the landlord, and failure by the landlord to repair, to make the repairs personally and look to the landlord for reimbursement, or to occupy the premises without repair and hold the landlord responsible for damages by action, or by recoupment to an action for the rent. Swim Dixie Pool Corp. v. Kraemer, 157 Ga. App. 748, 278 S.E.2d 448 (1981).

Evidence sufficient to preclude summary judgment.

- When evidence shows injured defendant took care to inspect work area for possible hazards before starting to remove a roof, asked workers for the property owner to stay away from the area defendant was working in and generally tried to keep the area safe, defendant's personal injury suit should survive summary judgment. Greenforest Baptist Church, Inc. v. Shropshire, 221 Ga. App. 465, 471 S.E.2d 547 (1996).

Constructive eviction.

- Rented building becomes untenantable and the tenant is constructively evicted therefrom and thereafter relieved of one's obligation to pay rent, when the landlord whose duty it is to keep it in a proper state of repair allows it to deteriorate to such an extent that it is an unfit place for the tenant to carry on the business for which it was rented, and when it cannot be restored to such condition by ordinary repairs which can be made without unreasonable interruption of the tenant's business. Overstreet v. Rhodes, 213 Ga. 181, 97 S.E.2d 561 (1957).

To establish an affirmative defense of constructive eviction from the rented premises it is necessary for the defendant to prove: (1) that the landlord in consequence of the landlord's failure to keep the rented building repaired allowed the building to deteriorate to such an extent that the building had become an unfit place for the defendant to carry on the business for which the building was rented; and (2) that the building could not be restored to a fit condition by ordinary repairs which could be made without unreasonable interruption of the tenant's business. Swim Dixie Pool Corp. v. Kraemer, 157 Ga. App. 748, 278 S.E.2d 448 (1981).

Express contract concerning repairs.

- Any statutory requirement as to the landlord-tenant relationship is not applicable or controlling in a case when the landlord and the tenant have expressly contracted as to this obligation with reference to repairs. Sewell v. Royal, 147 Ga. App. 88, 248 S.E.2d 165 (1978).

Contractual modification.

- Landlord may by express contract relieve oneself from liability for concealed defects in the premises, known to the landlord, but unknown to the tenant. Jadronja v. Bricker, 49 Ga. App. 37, 174 S.E. 251 (1934).

Owner of property not used as a "dwelling place" can contract to avoid the duties to repair and improve the property. Groutas v. McCoy, 219 Ga. App. 252, 464 S.E.2d 657 (1995).

Consideration for promise to repair.

- When by the terms of the lease the landlord has not the obligation of repairing the premises, a promise made by the landlord during the term to make repairs, or lay out money in having repairs made, must be supported by some new consideration to be valid. Jadronja v. Bricker, 49 Ga. App. 37, 174 S.E. 251 (1934).

Liability of subsequent purchaser.

- Subsequent purchaser is not personally liable for the breach to pay for repairs where the breach occurred prior to the purchase; the liability is personal to the landlord at the time of breach. Mead Corp. v. Abeles, 530 F.2d 38 (5th Cir. 1976).

Liability of vendee for improvements.

- When one rents premises under a contract to purchase and during the tenancy places repairs upon the premises, one cannot hold the vendee of one's landlord liable for the improvements because the landlord or vendee did not consent. Grizzle v. Gaddis, 75 Ga. 350 (1885).

No recovery against landlord's agent.

- While one may be a landlord without being the owner of the premises, yet the agent of the landlord to collect rents and who agrees and assumes the duty of making repairs does not become the landlord of the tenant, and no recovery can be had against such agent as landlord. Sanders v. A.T. Holt Co., 76 Ga. App. 279, 45 S.E.2d 480 (1947).

Nonowner as landlord.

- An action by a tenant, against one from whom the tenant rented certain premises, for damages on account of the negligence of the latter in making repairs to the premises is not subject to demurrer because it does not appear that the defendant is the owner of the premises; a person may be a landlord without being an owner. Hill v. Liebman, Inc., 53 Ga. App. 462, 186 S.E. 431 (1936).

Lapse of reasonable time in making repairs.

- In a suit for damages caused by a failure to repair a roof destroyed by fire, it should appear that the damage was done after the time when the landlord by proper diligence could have covered the building. Driver v. Maxwell, 56 Ga. 11 (1876); J.B. White & Co. v. Montgomery, 58 Ga. 204 (1877); Lewis & Co. v. Chisolm, 68 Ga. 40 (1881); Miller v. Smythe, 95 Ga. 288, 22 S.E. 532 (1895); Johnson v. Collins, 98 Ga. 271, 26 S.E. 744 (1896); Stack v. Harris, 111 Ga. 149, 36 S.E. 615 (1900); Gavan v. Norcross, 117 Ga. 356, 43 S.E. 771 (1903).

Landlord not insurer of tenant's safety.

- Even though the landlord is under a duty to keep the premises in repair pursuant to O.C.G.A. §§ 44-7-13 and44-7-14, the landlord is not an insurer of the tenant's safety. Ethridge v. Davis, 243 Ga. App. 11, 530 S.E.2d 477 (2000).

Husband's knowledge of defective condition not imputed to wife.

- Since the plaintiff had no notice or knowledge of the defective condition of the steps, which was a latent defect, she would not be precluded from recovering for injuries arising therefrom merely because her husband, who was the tenant, knew of the condition of the steps. Wall Realty Co. v. Leslie, 54 Ga. App. 560, 188 S.E. 600 (1936).

Relevancy of Housing Code violations in determining damages.

- Failure of the landlord to keep rented premises in repair as required by statute and to comply with provisions of the housing code would be relevant on the issue of ordinary damages to the property of the tenant, but would not per se authorize the imposition of punitive damages. Kaplan v. Sanders, 237 Ga. 132, 227 S.E.2d 38 (1976).

Questions for jury.

- Whether landlord who was aware of a defective gas heater failed to exercise reasonable care to repair the heater, and whether the condition of the heater constituted a violation of the housing code, were questions for the jury. Thompson v. Crownover, 259 Ga. 126, 381 S.E.2d 283 (1989).

Whether landlord approved substantial improvements made by the tenant to the property was a jury question. Roberts v. Roberts, 205 Ga. App. 371, 422 S.E.2d 253 (1992).

In a negligence action brought by a tenant who slipped and fell on the steps of the tenant's rented home, when both tenant and landlord were aware of a problem with the steps, the question was, given the tenant's equal or superior knowledge, whether the tenant could have avoided the accident, either by avoiding the problematic area, or by using the area more cautiously. Phillips v. King, 214 Ga. App. 712, 448 S.E.2d 780 (1994).

Whether a landlord provided an adequate fire detection and alarm system in a rented house was an issue of fact for the jury. Denise v. Cannon, 219 Ga. App. 765, 466 S.E.2d 885 (1995).

After learning that its back-up generator was irreparable, determining whether the landlord acted negligently, breached the statutory duties as landlord, or violated local ordinances or housing codes were questions for the jury. McCullough v. Briarcliff Summit, 237 Ga. App. 630, 516 S.E.2d 353 (1999).

Cited in Oakland Motor Car Co. v. Rippey Motor Co., 41 Ga. App. 784, 154 S.E. 823 (1930); Gledhill v. Harvey, 55 Ga. App. 322, 190 S.E. 61 (1937); Bixby v. Sinclair Ref. Co., 74 Ga. App. 626, 40 S.E.2d 677 (1946); Kanes v. Koutras, 203 Ga. 570, 47 S.E.2d 558 (1948); Ginsberg v. Wade, 95 Ga. App. 475, 97 S.E.2d 915 (1957); Golf Club Co. v. Rothstein, 97 Ga. App. 128, 102 S.E.2d 654 (1958); Big Apple Super Mkts. of Peachtree, Inc. v. W.J. Milner & Co., 111 Ga. App. 282, 141 S.E.2d 567 (1965); Howell Gas of Athens, Inc. v. Coile, 112 Ga. App. 732, 146 S.E.2d 145 (1965); Townsend & Ghegan Enters. v. W.R. Bean & Son, 117 Ga. App. 109, 159 S.E.2d 776 (1968); Scarboro Enters., Inc. v. Hirsh, 119 Ga. App. 866, 169 S.E.2d 182 (1969); Zeeman Mfg. Co. v. L.R. Sams Co., 123 Ga. App. 99, 179 S.E.2d 552 (1970); Kaplan v. Sanders, 136 Ga. App. 902, 222 S.E.2d 630 (1975); Porter v. Moschella, 152 Ga. App. 678, 263 S.E.2d 538 (1979); Bradley v. Godwin, 152 Ga. App. 782, 264 S.E.2d 262 (1979); Jacobi v. Timmers Chevrolet, Inc., 164 Ga. App. 198, 296 S.E.2d 777 (1982); Vizzini v. Blonder, 165 Ga. App. 840, 303 S.E.2d 38 (1983); Schuster v. Plaza Pac. Equities, Inc., 588 F. Supp. 61 (N.D. Ga. 1984); Bettis v. Ryle, 176 Ga. App. 88, 335 S.E.2d 399 (1985); Dyches Constr. Co. v. Strauss, 192 Ga. App. 454, 385 S.E.2d 316 (1989); Watts v. Jaffs, 216 Ga. App. 565, 455 S.E.2d 328 (1995); Culberson v. Lanier, 216 Ga. App. 686, 455 S.E.2d 385 (1995); Doe v. Prudential-Bache/A.G. Spanos Realty Partners, 222 Ga. App. 169, 474 S.E.2d 31 (1996); Doe v. Briargate Apts., Inc., 227 Ga. App. 408, 489 S.E.2d 170 (1997); Standard Mgt. Co. v. Scott, 229 Ga. App. 36, 493 S.E.2d 216 (1997).

Liability for injury from defective condition.

- Landlord is not an insurer, but the landlord is under a legal duty to keep the rented premises in repair, and is liable in damages to a person who receives injury while lawfully upon the premises and who is in the exercise of due care, if the injury arises because of the defective construction of a building erected on the premises by the landlord, or because of the landlord's failure to repair defects of which the landlord knows, or in the exercise of reasonable diligence ought to know. Oglesby v. Rutledge, 67 Ga. App. 656, 21 S.E.2d 497 (1942); Ween v. Saul, 88 Ga. App. 299, 76 S.E.2d 525 (1953).

Even if the lack of a smoke detector rendered a leased mobile home defective, the owner of the real property on which the mobile home was located did not violate a duty to supply a smoke detector since a third party owned the mobile home and rented the mobile home to the tenants. Crowder v. Larson, 236 Ga. App. 858, 513 S.E.2d 771 (1999).

Liability for dangerous condition.

- When a portion of leased premises is dangerously out of repair and such condition is known to tenant who continues to use that area, tenant cannot recover from the landlord for damages resulting from the condition; but the severity of the doctrine of assumption of risk has been ameliorated in cases where its application would make the tenant "a captive" in the tenant's own home. Carey v. Bradford, 218 Ga. App. 325, 461 S.E.2d 290 (1995).

When a dangerous area is tenant's only access or only safe or reasonable access to the home, tenant's equal knowledge of the danger does not excuse the landlord of damages caused by a failure to keep the premises in repair. Carey v. Bradford, 218 Ga. App. 325, 461 S.E.2d 290 (1995).

Landlord is bound to keep in repair the premises which landlord has leased, unless the contract of lease contains a stipulation to the contrary. Pharr v. Burnette, 158 Ga. App. 473, 280 S.E.2d 881 (1981).

Landlord has a duty to keep premises in repair, and when defects render premises unsafe or uninhabitable, a landlord may not avoid duties created by statutes or by housing codes even though the defect is patent. Roth v. Wu, 199 Ga. App. 665, 405 S.E.2d 741 (1991).

Plaintiff as tenant cannot place liability for improvements on defendants as landlords, absent consent to improvements or an agreement between the parties to the contrary. May v. May, 165 Ga. App. 461, 300 S.E.2d 215 (1983).

Failure to ameliorate mold and roach problems.

- Trial court erred in granting the landlord and property management company (defendants) summary judgment because the tenants presented evidence, including the failure to ameliorate the mold and roach problems, which was sufficient to create a jury question on the issue of whether the defendants violated the negligence per se statute of O.C.G.A. § 44-7-13. Ellis v. Hartford Run Apartments, LLC, 335 Ga. App. 118, 779 S.E.2d 103 (2015), cert. denied, No. S16C0607, 2016 Ga. LEXIS 289 (Ga. 2016).

Absence of contractual stipulation.

- Landlord, in the absence of a stipulation to the contrary, is bound to keep the premises in repair. Mathis v. Gazan, 51 Ga. App. 805, 181 S.E. 503 (1935); Paulk v. Ellis St. Realty Corp., 79 Ga. App. 36, 52 S.E.2d 625 (1949); Kersh v. Manis Whsle. Co., 135 Ga. App. 943, 219 S.E.2d 604 (1975).

Exculpatory provision void.

- Landlord's implied warranty concerning latent defects existing at the inception of the lease is sufficiently analogous to a contract for maintenance or repair that an exculpatory provision purporting to nullify the effect of the implied warranty is void and unenforceable; the landlord's warranty exists by operation of law in the interest of public safety. Porubiansky v. Emory Univ., 156 Ga. App. 602, 275 S.E.2d 163 (1980), aff'd, 248 Ga. 391, 282 S.E.2d 903 (1981).

Duty to repair arising from contract.

- When duty to repair or rebuild arises from a contract, it must be by an express agreement to that effect; it will not be inferred even from a reservation of the right to enter for that purpose. Gavan v. Norcross, 117 Ga. 356, 43 S.E. 771 (1903).

Suitability of rental property.

- It is the duty of the landlord to make rental property suitable for the purpose for which it is rented, unless the tenant knows as much about the property's condition as the landlord does; the landlord must, upon notice of any defect, keep it in such condition as to be suitable for such use. Whittle v. Webster, 55 Ga. 180 (1875); Driver v. Maxwell, 56 Ga. 11 (1876); J.B. White & Co. v. Montgomery, 58 Ga. 204 (1877); Lewis & Co. v. Chisolm, 68 Ga. 40 (1881); Miller v. Smythe, 95 Ga. 288, 22 S.E. 532 (1895); Johnson v. Collins, 98 Ga. 271, 26 S.E. 744 (1896); Stack v. Harris, 111 Ga. 149, 36 S.E. 615 (1900); Thompson v. Walker, 6 Ga. App. 80, 64 S.E. 336 (1909); Clements v. Blanchard, 141 Ga. 311, 80 S.E. 1004, 17 L.R.A. 993 (1914); Florence v. Northcutt, 145 Ga. 265, 88 S.E. 933 (1916); King v. Investors' Mtg. & Loan Co., 51 Ga. App. 235, 179 S.E. 910 (1935); Point Apts., Inc. v. Bryant, 99 Ga. App. 110, 107 S.E.2d 684 (1959).

Grant of summary judgment to an apartment management company on its counterclaim for unpaid rent was affirmed as its alleged failure to provide security or to properly repair the tenant's lock did not constitute acts of a grave and permanent character committed with the intention of depriving the tenant of the use of their apartment without unreasonable interruption nor did they render the apartment uninhabitable. George v. Hercules Real Estate Services, Inc., 339 Ga. App. 843, 795 S.E.2d 81 (2016).

Duty to inspect.

- When the landlord is notified that the premises are out of repair, it becomes the landlord's duty to inspect and investigate in order that the landlord may make such repairs as the safety of the tenant requires; therefore, when, after such notice, the landlord fails, within a reasonable time, to make the repairs, the landlord is chargeable with notice of all defects that a proper inspection would have disclosed. Mathis v. Gazan, 51 Ga. App. 805, 181 S.E. 503 (1935); Ball v. Murray, 91 Ga. App. 686, 86 S.E.2d 706 (1955); Dempsey v. Smith, 108 Ga. App. 88, 132 S.E.2d 233 (1963), overruled on other grounds, Frist v. U.S. 5 & 10 Stores, Inc., 110 Ga. App. 237, 138 S.E.2d 186 (1964).

No duty to inspect without request.

- When the tenant is in the exclusive possession and control of the rented premises, the landlord is under no duty to inspect the premises to ascertain whether or not repairs are needed, unless requested so to do. Ocean S.S. Co. v. Hamilton, 112 Ga. 901, 38 S.E. 204 (1901); Ross v. Jackson, 123 Ga. 657, 51 S.E. 578 (1905); Sutton v. Murray, 49 Ga. App. 130, 174 S.E. 174 (1934); Cone v. Lawhon, 61 Ga. App. 797, 7 S.E.2d 597 (1940); Elijah A. Brown Co. v. Wilson, 191 Ga. 750, 13 S.E.2d 779 (1941); Ramey v. Pritchett, 90 Ga. App. 745, 84 S.E.2d 305 (1954); Tribble v. Somers, 115 Ga. App. 847, 156 S.E.2d 130 (1967).

Duty to rebuild.

- Words, "keep . . . in repair," as used in this statute are not technical words, but are used in their ordinary sense. The usual meaning of "to repair" is to mend, to restore to a sound state what has been partially destroyed, to make good an existing thing; not to make a new thing, such as erecting a new building to take the place of one destroyed. The law requiring the landlord to keep the rented premises in repair does not mean that the landlord shall rebuild buildings wholly destroyed by casualty not caused by the landlord. Mayer & Crine v. Morehead, 106 Ga. 434, 32 S.E. 349 (1899); Sewell v. Royal, 147 Ga. App. 88, 248 S.E.2d 165 (1978) (see O.C.G.A. § 44-7-13).

Tenant's implied duty to rebuild.

- When the lessee has agreed "to repair" or "to keep in repair" generally the building or property rented and qualifies these words with other words, to-wit: to deliver the possession of the same property in the same condition at the expiration of the lease as at the time of the execution of the lease, natural wear and tear excepted (or words to like effect), the obligation is subject to the implied condition that the building or property shall be in existence at the end of the term and if before that time the property is destroyed by fire, the lessee will not be required, under the terms of the contract, to rebuild or be liable therefor. Otherwise when the covenant is to repair, or keep in repair generally, without the qualifying words, the tenant must rebuild. Williams v. Bernath, 61 Ga. App. 350, 6 S.E.2d 184 (1939).

Covenant to repair ordinarily does not bind the landlord to rebuild, though there are cases in which the word "repair," aided by the context, has been held to mean "rebuild." When the contract requires the tenant to keep the premises in repair, and return the premises in the same condition as when received, or other language is employed showing an intention to make either party rebuild, such duty will be imposed, even though the word "rebuild" is not used. Shippen v. Georgia Better Foods, Inc., 79 Ga. App. 813, 54 S.E.2d 704 (1949).

Rebuilding in case of destruction.

- Provision of this statute making landlords liable for repairs does not require landlords to rebuild in case of the destruction of the tenement. Mayer & Crine v. Morehead, 106 Ga. 434, 32 S.E. 349 (1899) (see O.C.G.A. § 44-7-13).

Negligent repair.

- When the landlord is notified of defective premises and undertakes to repair, landlord must do so properly; landlord will be liable if landlord negligently repairs the premises. Dempsey v. Hertsfield, 30 Ga. 866 (1860); Adams v. Klasing, 20 Ga. App. 203, 92 S.E. 960 (1917); Marr v. Dieter, 27 Ga. App. 711, 109 S.E. 532 (1921); Jadronja v. Bricker, 49 Ga. App. 37, 174 S.E. 251 (1934); Hill v. Liebman, Inc., 53 Ga. App. 462, 186 S.E. 431 (1936); Thomson v. Avery, 67 Ga. App. 671, 21 S.E.2d 331 (1942); Oglesby v. Rutledge, 67 Ga. App. 656, 21 S.E.2d 497 (1942).

Landlord is liable for damages when the repairs the landlord has a duty to make are completed negligently so that a defect in the premises remains despite the attempted repair. However, when the worker hired is an independent contractor, the landlord is not liable for the negligent acts of the worker during the course of the repairs. Mason v. Gracey, 189 Ga. App. 150, 375 S.E.2d 283 (1988).

Trial court erred in granting an apartment owner and a manager summary judgment in a tenant's action to recover damages for the personal injuries the tenant sustained from carbon-monoxide poisoning because the owner and manager could be liable for the actions of a construction company's workers even if the company, which was orally hired to assist in the clean up of the owner's apartments, was an independent contractor; the evidence showed that a temporary tarp repair the workers performed was completed so negligently that a defect in the premises was created, and some evidence showed that the company and its workers were not independent contractors. In placing a temporary tarp on the roof of the tenant's apartment, the company was performing the duty of the owner and manager to repair the premises by stopping a leak until a more permanent repair could be effected. Atkins v. MRP Park Lake, L. P., 301 Ga. App. 275, 687 S.E.2d 215 (2009).

Trial court erred in granting an apartment owner and a manager summary judgment in a tenant's action to recover damages for the personal injuries the tenant sustained from carbon-monoxide poisoning on the ground that the tenant had equal knowledge with the owner and manager that the vents of the apartment were covered because some evidence showed that other agents of the owner and manager had superior knowledge of the defect, and the evidence was disputed as to whether the tenant had equal knowledge; an employee of the owner and manager supervised the emergency repairs of the apartment and was constantly walking the property to check on those repairs, and should have seen the vent pipe problem. Atkins v. MRP Park Lake, L. P., 301 Ga. App. 275, 687 S.E.2d 215 (2009).

Questions of fact as to whether duty to repair was met.

- Trial court erred in granting the landlord and property management company (defendants) summary judgment because the tenants presented evidence that the tenants repeatedly notified the defendants about the problems with the apartment, but in spite of that notice, the defendants never made the apartment fit for habitation, which raised questions of fact for the jury to decide. Ellis v. Hartford Run Apartments, LLC, 335 Ga. App. 118, 779 S.E.2d 103 (2015), cert. denied, No. S16C0607, 2016 Ga. LEXIS 289 (Ga. 2016).

Liability for defects in construction.

- Landlord will not be liable for an injury to a tenant on account of defective construction of rented premises which the landlord has not constructed or caused to be constructed. However, when a building was defectively constructed by a predecessor in title of the landlord, and the landlord knew, or in the exercise of reasonable diligence could have known, of the building's improper construction before the tenancy was created, the landlord would be answerable to the plaintiff for injuries sustained by reason of a negligent failure to put the premises in a safe condition if the tenant could not have avoided the injury by the exercise of ordinary care. Thomson v. Avery, 67 Ga. App. 671, 21 S.E.2d 331 (1942).

Duty to prevent condemnation.

- When the relation between parties is purely landlord and tenant, the duty is on the landlord to make such improvements and repairs necessary to preserve the buildings on the premises and prevent their decadence as well as to prevent their condemnation and destruction as fire hazards and unsafe buildings, and as nuisances. Evans Theatre Corp. v. De Give Inv. Co., 79 Ga. App. 62, 52 S.E.2d 655 (1949).

Landlord's duty to subtenant.

- It is the duty of the landlord to keep the premises in repair, whether the premises be occupied by a tenant or a subtenant. Hooks v. Bailey, 5 Ga. App. 211, 62 S.E. 1054 (1908).

No continuing obligation to repair.

- When a lease provided that the lessee would make all necessary repairs, and require no repairs be made by the lessor, the mere fact that the landlord has made repairs at the request of the tenant does not impose upon the landlord any obligation to continue to make repairs. Jadronja v. Bricker, 49 Ga. App. 37, 174 S.E. 251 (1934).

Landlord not insurer.

- Landlord is not an insurer of the tenant's safety, but the landlord is certainly no bystander. Warner v. Arnold, 133 Ga. App. 174, 210 S.E.2d 350 (1974).

Landlord not liable absent notice or actual knowledge of defect.

- Landlord is not liable to a tenant for injuries resulting from defects unless the landlord has had actual knowledge of the defects, or has been notified of such defects and has failed to make repairs within a reasonable time and the tenant could not have avoided the injuries resulting therefrom by the exercise of ordinary care on the tenant's own part. Stack v. Harris, 111 Ga. 149, 36 S.E. 615 (1900); McGee v. Hardacre, 27 Ga. App. 106, 107 S.E. 563 (1921); Kleinberg v. Lyons, 39 Ga. App. 774, 148 S.E. 535 (1929); Wallace v. Adams, 47 Ga. App. 144, 169 S.E. 852 (1933); Mathis v. Gazan, 51 Ga. App. 805, 181 S.E. 503 (1935).

Landlord, in the absence of a stipulation to the contrary, is bound to keep the premises in repair. Landlord is, however, entitled to notice from the tenant that the premises are out of repair, and if, after such notice has been given, the tenant suffers damage on account of the failure of the landlord to make the necessary repairs, the landlord is liable for the damage thus sustained, provided the conduct of the tenant was not such as to preclude the tenant from recovering. Harris v. Edge, 92 Ga. App. 827, 90 S.E.2d 47 (1955); Point Apts., Inc. v. Bryant, 99 Ga. App. 110, 107 S.E.2d 684 (1959).

When the premises were destroyed by a fire originating from a furnace, the landlord, who had no actual knowledge of any furnace problem, could not be charged with notice that the removal of exterior asbestos shingles may have created a hazard with the furnace. Harris v. Sloan, 199 Ga. App. 340, 405 S.E.2d 68, cert. denied, 199 Ga. App. 906, 405 S.E.2d 68 (1991).

No duty without notice.

- Landlord has no duty to repair until the landlord has notice of, or otherwise acquires knowledge of, the necessity for repair. Upchurch v. Coggins, 70 Ga. App. 205, 27 S.E.2d 869 (1943); Holloway v. Feinberg, 100 Ga. App. 160, 110 S.E.2d 413 (1959); Davis v. General Gas Corp., 106 Ga. App. 317, 126 S.E.2d 820 (1962).

Effect of notice.

- Notice of a defect given by the tenant to the landlord charges the landlord with notice of such other defects as might reasonably be discovered by a compliance with such request for repairs. Stack v. Harris, 111 Ga. 149, 36 S.E. 615 (1900); Roach v. LeGree, 18 Ga. App. 250, 89 S.E. 167 (1916); Cone v. Lawhon, 61 Ga. App. 797, 7 S.E.2d 597 (1940); Home Owners Loan Corp. v. Brazzeal, 62 Ga. App. 683, 9 S.E.2d 773 (1940); Shattles v. Blanchard, 87 Ga. App. 15, 73 S.E.2d 112 (1952); Ball v. Murray, 91 Ga. App. 686, 86 S.E.2d 706 (1955).

Effect of notice of patent defect.

- Notice of a separate and independent patent defect, in no way connected with the latent defect which is alleged to have occasioned the injury, cannot be taken as constructive notice of the latter, or as devolving upon the landlord any duty of inspection. Hendrick v. Muse, 48 Ga. App. 295, 172 S.E. 661 (1934); Cone v. Lawhon, 61 Ga. App. 797, 7 S.E.2d 597 (1940); Tribble v. Somers, 115 Ga. App. 847, 156 S.E.2d 130 (1967).

Liability after notice or knowledge.

- When the landlord, after knowledge or notice that the premises are out of repair, neglects to repair the premises within a reasonable time the landlord may be liable to the tenant in a proper case for damage sustained by reason of the failure to make such repairs. Whittle v. Webster, 55 Ga. 180 (1875); Stack v. Harris, 111 Ga. 149, 36 S.E. 615 (1900); Ross v. Jackson, 123 Ga. 657, 51 S.E. 578 (1905); Wall Realty Co. v. Leslie, 54 Ga. App. 560, 188 S.E. 600 (1936); Oglesby v. Rutledge, 67 Ga. App. 656, 21 S.E.2d 497 (1942); Midtown Chain Hotels Co. v. Bender, 77 Ga. App. 723, 49 S.E.2d 779 (1948).

No actual or constructive knowledge.

- Landlord is not liable for injuries to a tenant on account of latent defects existing at the time of the lease, which the landlord might have discovered by an inspection not required of the landlord by law, unless the landlord actually knew, or by the exercise of ordinary care might otherwise have known, of their existence. Tribble v. Somers, 115 Ga. App. 847, 156 S.E.2d 130 (1967).

Landlord without actual notice of defect.

- Owner may be held liable for injuries arising from failure to maintain building in proper repair, even without actual notice of the defect, if, in the exercise of ordinary care, the owner should have known of the defect. Home Owners Loan Corp. v. Brazzeal, 62 Ga. App. 683, 9 S.E.2d 773 (1940).

Property company was not liable for negligence after an apartment fire because, even assuming that the alleged defect existed and caused the fire, the company lacked notice of the condition. There was no evidence that the stove lacked drip pans when the victim moved into the apartment and the company was never told of a problem with the stove. Haynes v. Kingstown Props., Inc., 260 Ga. App. 102, 578 S.E.2d 898 (2003).

Actual knowledge derived from inspection.

- Whether or not owner was under the duty to inspect for latent defects, having actually made such inspection the owner was under the duty to make such repairs as may have been called for by the knowledge so obtained. Home Owners Loan Corp. v. Brazzeal, 62 Ga. App. 683, 9 S.E.2d 773 (1940).

Landlord not in possession.

- When landlord has surrendered complete possession to tenant landlord must have knowledge of defect, or have been notified to repair, before landlord becomes liable. Finley v. Williams, 45 Ga. App. 863, 166 S.E. 265 (1932); Home Owners Loan Corp. v. Brazzeal, 62 Ga. App. 683, 9 S.E.2d 773 (1940); Shattles v. Blanchard, 87 Ga. App. 15, 73 S.E.2d 112 (1952); Ball v. Murray, 91 Ga. App. 686, 86 S.E.2d 706 (1955).

Notice not required when landlord retains qualified possession.

- When a landlord retains a qualified possession of and a general supervision over the rented premises, by placing an agent in charge thereof, no notice from the tenant is required. Guthman v. Castleberry, 49 Ga. 272 (1873); J.B. White & Co. v. Montgomery, 58 Ga. 204 (1877); Monahan v. National Realty Co., 4 Ga. App. 680, 62 S.E. 127 (1908); Florence v. Northcutt, 145 Ga. 265, 88 S.E. 933 (1916); Davis v. Hall, 21 Ga. App. 265, 94 S.E. 274 (1917).

Landlord occupying premises.

- When a landlord occupies a room in the rented premises the landlord is presumed to have knowledge of the defective and leaky condition of the roof, and notice by the tenant to repair is not necessary. Turner v. Long, 61 Ga. App. 785, 7 S.E.2d 595 (1940).

Landlord must be charged with knowledge of the physical construction of the landlord's own premises. Shattles v. Blanchard, 87 Ga. App. 15, 73 S.E.2d 112 (1952).

When structure is built by predecessor in title of a landlord, or by some other person not acting under the supervision of the landlord, before the landlord can be held liable for injuries caused by the defective structure, it must appear that the landlord actually knew, or by the exercise of ordinary diligence could and should have known, of the improper construction before the tenancy was created; or that the landlord had been notified thereof by the tenant, and had failed, after a reasonable time, to repair and render the defective structure safe; or that the landlord had acquired such knowledge, and had failed, after a reasonable time, to render the structure safe. Upchurch v. Coggins, 70 Ga. App. 205, 27 S.E.2d 869 (1943).

Patent defects known at lease.

- If there are patent defects known to both parties at the time of executing the lease, and the lessee takes the premises as the premises are, the lessee cannot thereafter demand that the landlord remedy the defect. Driver v. Maxwell, 56 Ga. 11 (1876); Aikin v. Perry, 119 Ga. 263, 46 S.E. 93 (1903); Lumpkin v. Provident Loan Soc'y, Inc., 15 Ga. App. 816, 84 S.E. 216 (1915); Desverges v. Marchant, 18 Ga. App. 248, 89 S.E. 221 (1916).

Notice to agent.

- Notice of the defective condition of the property when given to the agent with whom the tenant dealt under instructions of the landlord, and to whom the rents were paid, is notice to the landlord. Wall Realty Co. v. Leslie, 54 Ga. App. 560, 188 S.E. 600 (1936).

Burden of proof of notice.

- In order to sustain a cause of action against a landlord for failure to keep the premises in repair, the tenant must allege and prove that the tenant has given the landlord notice of the defective condition of the premises. Roach v. LeGree, 18 Ga. App. 250, 89 S.E. 167 (1916).

Knowledge of owner as jury question.

- Fact that landing floor broke through, when used in the ordinary manner by the plaintiff, together with the fact of the floor's condition as shown by the exhibits and openness of the inspection, made it a jury question as to whether or not the floor's defective condition could have been known to the owner by the exercise of ordinary care. Home Owners Loan Corp. v. Brazzeal, 62 Ga. App. 683, 9 S.E.2d 773 (1940).

Reasonable notice as jury question.

- Question of what is a reasonable time for the performance of an act required to be performed upon "reasonable notice" is determined by the character of the act contemplated, considered with its purposes and the attendant facts and circumstances, and accordingly, when, the only means of ingress and egress from an apartment rented by the landlord is a set of outside steps, whether two days' notice of a defect in the steps is such reasonable notice as would raise a duty on the part of the landlord to repair the steps within such period of time is a jury question. Shattles v. Blanchard, 87 Ga. App. 15, 73 S.E.2d 112 (1952).

Duty of tenant to give notice.

- When rented premises become out of repair, it is the duty of the tenant to notify the landlord of this fact, and also to abstain from using any part of the premises, the use of which would be attended with danger. J.B. White & Co. v. Montgomery, 58 Ga. 204 (1877); Ocean S.S. Co. v. Hamilton, 112 Ga. 901, 38 S.E. 204 (1901); Clements v. Blanchard, 141 Ga. 311, 80 S.E. 204, 1917A L.R.A. 993 (1914); Roach v. LeGree, 18 Ga. App. 250, 89 S.E. 167 (1916); Alexander v. Owen, 18 Ga. App. 326, 89 S.E. 437 (1916); Davis v. Hall, 21 Ga. App. 265, 94 S.E. 274 (1917).

Acceptance of premises.

- When lessees accepted the premises in the condition in which the premises were at the time of the lease, as suitable for the purpose intended, and further relieved the landlord of any obligation to repair except after written notice, these provisions in the contract constituted a "stipulation to the contrary" relieving the lessor of any duty to repair the premises except after notice to it by the tenants. Point Apts., Inc. v. Bryant, 99 Ga. App. 110, 107 S.E.2d 684 (1959).

Effect of tenant's covenant to repair.

- Tenant will not be required to make repairs in addition to or beyond those expressly covenanted in the contract. Midtown Chain Hotels Co. v. Bender, 77 Ga. App. 723, 49 S.E.2d 779 (1948).

Tenant's covenant to keep the rented premises in repair absolves the landlord from the landlord's statutory duty to make repairs. Browning v. F.E. Fortenberry & Sons, 131 Ga. App. 498, 206 S.E.2d 101 (1974); Kersh v. Manis Whsle. Co., 135 Ga. App. 943, 219 S.E.2d 604 (1975).

Election by tenant.

- Tenant may repair and charge the landlord or the tenant may notify the landlord that the repairs are needed. Vason v. City of Augusta, 38 Ga. 542 (1868); Driver v. Maxwell, 56 Ga. 11 (1876).

Landlord must keep the premises in repair; and if on notice the landlord fails to do so, the tenant has a right of action, or the tenant may recoup against the rent. Lewis & Co. v. Chisolm, 68 Ga. 40 (1881); Mayer & Crine v. Morehead, 106 Ga. 434, 32 S.E. 349 (1899).

Tenant has as tenant's option to make the repairs and recover from the landlord the reasonable expense incurred, the tenant can set off the expense against the rent, or the tenant may omit to make the repairs personally and may seek compensation by an action for the damages. Dougherty v. Taylor & Norton Co., 5 Ga. App. 773, 63 S.E. 928 (1909).

Recoupment against distress warrant.

- When the landlord fails to repair the roof of the storehouse, after notice of the roof's leaky condition, and the tenant's goods are damaged thereby, the tenant is entitled to recoup the amount of such damages as against a distress warrant for the rent. Williamson v. May, 44 Ga. App. 532, 162 S.E. 162 (1932).

Use of defective premises as negligence.

- When rented premises become defective and unsafe, it is the duty of the tenant to refrain from using that part of the premises the use of which would be attended with danger; it is the tenant's duty to exercise ordinary care for the tenant's own safety; and when the tenant is injured as a result of the tenant's failure to exercise such care, the tenant cannot recover damages from the tenant's landlord. Guthman v. Castleberry, 48 Ga. 172 (1873); Driver v. Maxwell, 56 Ga. 11 (1876); Stack v. Harris, 111 Ga. 149, 36 S.E. 615 (1900); Henley v. Brockman, 124 Ga. 1059, 53 S.E. 672 (1906); Donehoe v. Crane, 141 Ga. 224, 80 S.E. 712 (1914); Roach v. LeGree, 18 Ga. App. 250, 89 S.E. 167 (1916); Mathis v. Gazan, 51 Ga. App. 805, 181 S.E. 503 (1935); Turner v. Long, 61 Ga. App. 785, 7 S.E.2d 595 (1940); Brooks v. Arnold, 89 Ga. App. 782, 81 S.E.2d 289 (1954); Holloway v. Feinberg, 100 Ga. App. 160, 110 S.E.2d 413 (1959).

Even after notice to the defendant, the tenants had a perfect right to use that part of the premises which was apparently in good and sound condition, unless there was something to call their attention to a defect in that part. Clements v. Blanchard, 141 Ga. 311, 80 S.E. 1004, 17 L.R.A. 993 (1914); Roach v. LeGree, 18 Ga. App. 250, 89 S.E. 167 (1916); Mathis v. Gazan, 51 Ga. App. 805, 181 S.E. 503 (1935).

By electing to use a stairway at night, when the lighting was out, a tenant assumed the risk of injury as a matter of law and was thus barred from recovery. Wells v. Citizens & S. Trust Co., 199 Ga. App. 31, 403 S.E.2d 826, cert. denied, 199 Ga. App. 907, 403 S.E.2d 826 (1991).

Quality of repairs by tenant.

- In making the necessary repairs the tenant is not bound to use precisely the same materials as were originally used. If the tenant employs capable workmen, uses suitable materials, and the work is reasonable and properly done, the tenant is entitled to be reimbursed for the money expended by the tenant in making the repairs. Dougherty v. Taylor & Norton Co., 5 Ga. App. 773, 63 S.E. 928 (1909).

Liability where tenant supervised work.

- When a tenant had been occupying a certain store, and at the tenant's instance and under the tenant's immediate supervision the landlord caused repairs to be made in the flooring, and thereupon the tenant rented for a term, agreeing that no repairs should be required to the landlord, if the floor subsequently gave way by reason of putting a heavy load upon the floor, there could be no setoff from the rent on account of damages resulting from such accident. Bosworth v. Thomas, 67 Ga. 640 (1881).

Persons present with tenant's permission.

- Members of a tenant's family, the tenant's guests, servants, employees, and others present at the tenant's express or implied invitation, stand in the tenant's shoes, and are controlled by the rules governing the tenant as to the right of recovery for injuries arising from failure to keep the premises in repair. Wallace v. Adams, 47 Ga. App. 144, 169 S.E. 852 (1933); Oglesby v. Rutledge, 67 Ga. App. 656, 21 S.E.2d 497 (1942).

Negligence not imputed to child.

- Child of three years of age is conclusively presumed to be incapable of contributory negligence, and any negligence of the tenant in failing to prevent the tenant's child from using the alleged defective portion of the premises would not be imputable to the child in an action maintained in the child's own behalf. Oglesby v. Rutledge, 67 Ga. App. 656, 21 S.E.2d 497 (1942).

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 49 Am. Jur. 2d, Landlord and Tenant, § 618 et seq.

C.J.S.

- 51C C.J.S., Landlord and Tenant, §§ 366 et seq., 387 et seq.

ALR.

- Breach of lessor's agreement as ground of liability for personal injury to tenant or one in privity with latter, 8 A.L.R. 765; 78 A.L.R.2d 1238.

Status of one employed by landlord to perform work on premises who enters or remains without consent or against protest of tenant, 10 A.L.R. 715.

Effect of noninhabitability of leased dwelling or apartment, 13 A.L.R. 818; 29 A.L.R. 52; 34 A.L.R. 711.

Rights and remedies of tenant upon landlord's breach of covenant to repair, 28 A.L.R. 1448; 28 A.L.R.2d 446.

Necessity of notice to landlord as condition of asserting breach of express covenant to repair, 28 A.L.R. 1525.

Measure of damages for breach of landlord's covenant to heat, or furnish hot water for, premises leased for business or manufacturing purposes, 28 A.L.R. 1550.

Transfer or devolution of reversion as carrying lessee's covenants to repair, or to yield up in repair, 34 A.L.R. 782.

Liability of landlord for personal injuries due to defective halls, stairways, and the like, for use of different tenants, 39 A.L.R. 294; 58 A.L.R. 1411; 75 A.L.R. 154; 97 A.L.R. 220.

Extent of lessee's obligation under express covenant as to repairs, 45 A.L.R. 12; 20 A.L.R. 782.

Landlord's responsibility to third persons for conditions created during tenancy as affected by renewal of the lease, or a new lease subject to the original lease, 49 A.L.R. 1418.

Liability of landlord for injury to person or property of tenant or his privies, from defects in heating or lighting plant or plumbing, 52 A.L.R. 864.

Conclusiveness of appraisal of buildings or other improvements under provision of lease for compensation to tenant on termination of lease, 53 A.L.R. 697.

Rights and remedies of parties where landlord fails to exercise option to renew lease at end of term or pay lessee for improvements, 63 A.L.R. 1158.

Breach of covenant to furnish heat for building or room other than dwelling or apartment as an eviction, 69 A.L.R. 1093.

Constructive notice by record of true title or interest as affecting right to compensation for improvements, 82 A.L.R. 921.

Equitable lien on real property in favor of one who makes advances or expenditures to improve the same, 89 A.L.R. 1455.

Rights as between surviving spouse and holder of leasehold interest under a lease from deceased spouse in respect of improvements made pursuant to provisions of lease, 92 A.L.R. 1382.

Common-law duty of landlord as regards installation and maintenance of fire equipment, 122 A.L.R. 167.

Lessor as subject to income tax in respect of improvements or additions by lessee, 138 A.L.R. 238.

Validity, construction, and application of statute or ordinance which precludes recovery of rent in case of occupancy of building which does not conform to building and health regulations, or where certificate of conformity has not been issued, 144 A.L.R. 259.

Landlord's liability for injury to person or damage to property as affected by his making of repairs in absence of obligation to do so, 150 A.L.R. 1373.

Covenant respecting condition of premises as requiring indemnity for amount paid or liability incurred on account of injury to third person or his property, 157 A.L.R. 623.

Lease of premises as affecting owner's liability for injury arising out of condition in highway connected with use of property, 160 A.L.R. 825.

Breach of lessor's agreement to repair as ground of liability for personal injury to tenant or one in privity with latter, 163 A.L.R. 300; 78 A.L.R.2d 1238.

Statute requiring property to be kept in good repair as affecting landlord's liability for personal injury to tenant or his privies, 17 A.L.R.2d 704.

Extent of lessee's obligation under express covenant as to repairs, 20 A.L.R.2d 1331.

Tenant's right to lien, in absence of agreement therefor, for improvements made on leased premises, 25 A.L.R.2d 885.

Landlord's liability for injury to tenant's person or property caused by water overflowing from defective appliances in other premises of landlord, 26 A.L.R.2d 1044.

Liability of landlord to tenant or member of tenant's family, for injury by animal or insect, 67 A.L.R.2d 1005.

Clause of lease providing for payment of taxes by lessor as applicable to increase in real estate taxes occasioned by lessee's improvements, 68 A.L.R.2d 1289.

Landlord's liability for personal injury or death of tenant or his privies from heating system or equipment, 86 A.L.R.2d 791.

Landlord's liability for personal injury or death of tenant or privies from electrical system or equipment, 86 A.L.R.2d 838.

Improvements and betterments insurance, 97 A.L.R.2d 1243.

Effect, on nonsigner, of provision of lease exempting landlord from liability on account of condition of property, 12 A.L.R.3d 958.

Premises liability: proceeding in the dark as contributory negligence, 22 A.L.R.3d 286.

Who, as between landlord and tenant, must make, or bear expense of, alterations, improvements, or repairs ordered by public authorities, 22 A.L.R.3d 521.

Landlord's liability for damage to tenant's property caused by water, 35 A.L.R.3d 143.

Modern status of the rule absolving a possessor of land of liability to those coming thereon for harm caused by dangerous physical conditions in which the injured party knew and realized the risk, 35 A.L.R.3d 230.

Modern status of rules as to existence of implied warranty of habitability or fitness for use of leased premises, 40 A.L.R.3d 646.

Landlord's failure to repair as aggravated negligence or similar fault, 40 A.L.R.3d 795.

Tenant's right, where landlord fails to make repairs, to have them made and set off cost against rent, 40 A.L.R.3d 1369.

Liability of owner or operator of park for mobile homes or trailers for injuries caused by appliances or other instruments on premises, 41 A.L.R.3d 324.

Landlord's liability for injury or death due to defects in areas of building (other than stairways) used in common by tenants, 65 A.L.R.3d 14.

Liability of landlord for personal injury or death due to inadequacy or lack of lighting on portion of premises used in common by tenants, 66 A.L.R.3d 202.

Landlord's liability for personal injury or death due to defects in appliances supplied for use of different tenants, 66 A.L.R.3d 374.

Landlord's liability for injury or death due to defects in outside walks, drives, or grounds used in common by tenants, 68 A.L.R.3d 382.

Landlord's liability to tenant's child for personal injuries resulting from defects in premises, as affected by tenant's negligence with respect to supervision of child, 82 A.L.R.3d 1079.

Failure of landlord to make, or permit tenant to make, repairs or alterations required by public authority as constructive eviction, 86 A.L.R.3d 352.

Liability for injuries in connection with ice or snow on nonresidential premises, 95 A.L.R.3d 15.

Landlord and tenant: violation of statute or ordinance requiring landlord to furnish specified facilities or services as ground of liability for injury resulting from tenant's attempt to deal with deficiency, 63 A.L.R.4th 883.

Landlord's liability to third party for repairs authorized by tenant, 46 A.L.R.5th 1.

Comparative negligence, contributory negligence and assumption of risk in action against owner of store, office, or similar place of business by invitee falling on tracked-in water or snow, 83 A.L.R.5th 589.