## Facts

- Building Monitoring Systems, Inc. owned the Jordanaire West Apartments in West Jordan, Utah.
- Michael Paxton and Amy Lowder rented a unit on a month-to-month basis beginning in December 1991.
- After taking possession, the tenants notified the resident manager of defective plumbing and wiring and other substandard conditions.
- On August 9, 1993, the tenants complained to the local Health Department about conditions including an inoperable refrigerator, leaking sinks, decaying bathroom walls, and deteriorated carpeting.
- The Health Department found regulatory violations and ordered the landlord to make repairs by September 7, 1993.
- On September 1, 1993, before the compliance deadline, the landlord served an eviction notice effective September 30; the tenancy was later reinstated when the landlord accepted October rent.
- Around October 12, 1993, the tenants again complained to the Health Department and provided the landlord a written list of needed repairs.
- One day after receiving notice of the renewed complaint, the landlord served a second eviction notice requiring the tenants to vacate by October 31.
- The landlord filed an unlawful detainer action under Utah Code Ann. § 78-36-3(1)(b)(i) seeking possession, costs, and attorney’s fees.
- The tenants asserted retaliatory eviction as an affirmative defense and sought to enjoin the eviction.
- The trial court found the eviction was retaliatory but ruled the defense unavailable absent Utah statutory or prior case authority, and entered judgment for the landlord.

## Issues

1. Whether retaliatory eviction is an affirmative defense to an unlawful detainer action in Utah when the landlord terminates a month-to-month tenancy in response to tenants’ good-faith complaints to health or code authorities.

## Decision

- The Utah Supreme Court reversed and remanded.
- The court held that retaliatory eviction is an affirmative defense to an unlawful detainer action in Utah.
- Because the trial court had already found the eviction was retaliatory, the landlord could not obtain possession on that basis, and further proceedings were required consistent with recognition of the defense.

## Legal Principles

- A landlord may not terminate or refuse to renew a tenancy for a retaliatory purpose when the tenant, in good faith, complains to governmental authorities or otherwise exercises rights related to health, safety, or housing conditions.
- Public policy reflected in Utah’s housing and health regulatory scheme supports protecting tenants from eviction motivated by their reports of violations, because tenant complaints are necessary for enforcement.
- The absence of an express Utah retaliatory-eviction statute does not preclude a common-law defense where allowing retaliation would frustrate legislative aims to secure safe and sanitary housing.
- Landlords retain the right to evict for lawful, nonretaliatory reasons; the defense bars eviction when the motivating reason is retaliation for protected tenant conduct.

## Conclusion

Utah recognizes retaliatory eviction as an affirmative defense in unlawful detainer actions, preventing a landlord from using termination of a month-to-month tenancy to punish tenants for good-faith complaints to health or housing authorities.


Building Monitoring Systems, Inc. v. Paxton, 905 P.2d 1215 (Utah 1995)