## Facts

- A low-income tenant rented an apartment in Rutland, Vermont under an oral lease for $140 per month and paid a $50 damage deposit.
- From the start and throughout a fourteen-month tenancy, the unit had serious conditions affecting essential facilities, including a broken kitchen window, lack of a front-door key, an inoperable toilet, a nonfunctioning bathroom light/outlet, water leaks causing falling plaster, and persistent raw sewage odor.
- The tenant repeatedly notified the landlord and received promises of repair, but multiple defects were not corrected.
- The tenant paid all rent due during the tenancy and paid out of pocket for certain fixes (e.g., window repair and adding a padlock).
- The landlord did not return the tenant’s damage deposit, disputing receipt.

## Issues

1. Whether Vermont residential leases include an implied warranty of habitability requiring delivery and maintenance of premises safe, clean, and fit for human habitation.
2. Whether a tenant who remains in possession may recover all rent paid for a period when the premises were uninhabitable due to the landlord’s breach.
3. Whether the trial court applied a sufficiently clear and correct measure of compensatory damages beyond rent reimbursement.
4. Whether one landlord’s actions bound the other under apparent authority, supporting joint liability.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Vermont recognized an implied warranty of habitability in residential leases.
- The court held that the tenant’s rent obligation is contingent on the landlord’s duty to provide a habitable dwelling.
- The court affirmed that the tenant could recover the rent paid during the period of breach even though she did not abandon the premises.
- The court affirmed the finding that one landlord acted on his own behalf and with the apparent authority of the other, supporting liability for both.
- The court affirmed in part and reversed in part, remanding for further proceedings because the basis for additional compensatory damages beyond rent reimbursement was not adequately articulated.

## Legal Principles

- Residential leases include an implied warranty of habitability requiring the landlord to deliver and maintain premises that are safe, clean, and fit for human habitation.
- The warranty applies to latent and patent defects affecting essential facilities vital to residential use.
- The tenant must notify the landlord of defects and allow a reasonable time to cure before recovering for breach.
- The warranty cannot be waived by lease terms, and a tenant’s awareness of defects does not shift the risk to the tenant.
- Remedies for breach may include rent withholding, repair-and-deduct, recovery of rent already paid (including full rent abatement where conditions warrant), and punitive damages for willful and wanton or fraudulent conduct.
- Apparent authority may render co-owners or co-landlords jointly responsible where one acts as the responsible party in leasing and repair dealings.

## Conclusion

The court adopted an implied warranty of habitability for Vermont residential leases and held that a tenant may remain in possession yet recover rent paid for an uninhabitable period, while requiring clearer articulation of additional compensatory damages and sustaining joint liability based on apparent authority.


Hilder v. St. Peter, 144 Vt. 150, 478 A.2d 202 (Vt. 1984)