## Facts

- A landlord leased the sixth floor of its building to a corporate tenant for office use and for manufacturing, selling, and shipping electrical advertising display signs.
- The lease required the landlord to furnish steam heat during ordinary business hours in the heating season.
- The tenant alleged repeated periods without heat in November and December 1927, typically lasting two to five hours on cold days, and one instance of six hours without heat.
- The tenant alleged that lack of heat impaired office and production work, that complaints were made to the landlord, and that the landlord failed to correct the condition.
- On February 20, 1928, the tenant alleged the temperature at opening was below 50°, delaying operations until later that morning.
- The tenant gave notice on February 20, 1928 that it would vacate on April 30, 1928, and it did so; the lease term ran until September 30, 1928.
- The landlord obtained a judgment by confession for the last five months’ rent (May–September 1928) plus attorney’s fees.
- The tenant moved to vacate the confessed judgment, asserting constructive eviction based on failure to provide heat; the motion was denied and affirmed on appeal.

## Issues

1. Whether the tenant’s affidavit alleged facts that, if true, established constructive eviction from the landlord’s failure to furnish heat, excusing rent after the tenant vacated.
2. Whether the tenant’s showing was sufficiently substantial to require vacating a judgment by confession to allow the defense to be litigated.

## Decision

- The Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the judgment leaving the confessed judgment in place.
- The court held the alleged heating failures, as pleaded, did not amount to constructive eviction as a matter of law.
- Because the asserted defense was not substantial on the stated facts, the trial court did not err in refusing to vacate the confessed judgment.

## Legal Principles

- Constructive eviction requires a landlord-caused condition that substantially interferes with the tenant’s beneficial use so as to make the premises materially unfit for the leased purpose, coupled with abandonment within a reasonable time.
- A breach of a covenant to furnish heat supports constructive eviction only if the failure effectively renders the premises untenantable; intermittent discomfort or partial impairment is insufficient.
- To vacate or open a judgment by confession, the moving party must present a specific, meritorious defense supported by facts that would constitute a defense if proven; conclusory characterizations do not suffice.

## Conclusion

Intermittent lapses in heat for limited periods during business hours, followed by continued occupancy for months, did not show substantial untenantability or timely abandonment required for constructive eviction, and therefore did not warrant vacating a confessed judgment for unpaid rent.


Automobile Supply Co. v. Scene-in-Action Corp., 340 Ill. 196, 172 N.E. 35 (Ill. 1930)