## Facts

- A landlord leased a Des Moines residence to tenants for use as a home.
- The landlord sued the tenants for three months’ unpaid rent after they stopped paying and later vacated.
- The tenants alleged the premises were in serious disrepair at the outset, violated the municipal housing code, and were unsafe, unsanitary, and untenantable.
- The tenants alleged the landlord had been notified of code violations in 1968 and that in June 1970 a bathroom ceiling collapse injured an occupant, prompting a city housing inspector’s notice of violations.
- The tenants alleged the city declared the property a public nuisance and ordered them to vacate.
- The tenants asserted these conditions as an affirmative defense to the rent claim and filed a counterclaim seeking return of rent previously paid.

## Issues

1. Whether an urban residential lease includes an implied warranty that the premises are and will remain habitable and in substantial compliance with housing codes.
2. Whether breach of that implied warranty may be asserted as an affirmative defense to a landlord’s action for rent.
3. Whether breach of that implied warranty may support an affirmative counterclaim for damages, including recovery of rent paid during periods of uninhabitability.
4. Whether the trial court erred by striking the tenants’ defense, dismissing the counterclaim for failure to state a claim, and directing a verdict for the landlord.

## Decision

- The Iowa Supreme Court reversed the directed verdict and the trial court orders striking the affirmative defense and dismissing the counterclaim.
- The court held that urban residential leases carry an implied warranty of habitability, grounded in contract principles and public policy reflected in housing codes.
- The court held that tenants may invoke the implied warranty both defensively (to defeat or reduce rent) and affirmatively (to seek damages).
- The case was remanded for a new trial permitting litigation of the tenants’ warranty-based defense and counterclaim.

## Legal Principles

- In urban residential leasing, the lease is treated primarily as a contract, not merely a conveyance of an estate in land.
- A residential landlord impliedly warrants that the premises are fit for human habitation at the inception of the lease and will be maintained in a habitable condition during the tenancy.
- Habitability includes freedom from substantial latent defects and substantial compliance with applicable housing codes.
- Breach of the implied warranty of habitability may be raised as a defense to a rent action and may also support an affirmative claim for damages, including rent recovery for periods of uninhabitability.
- Trial courts should not dispose of habitability-based defenses and counterclaims as legally insufficient when the pleadings allege serious code-related defects affecting safety and sanitation.

## Conclusion

The court recognized an implied warranty of habitability in urban residential leases and held that tenants may use the warranty both to defend against rent claims and to pursue damages, requiring a new trial where the tenants’ code-violation and uninhabitability allegations could be heard.


Mease v. Fox, 200 N.W.2d 791 (Iowa 1972)