## Facts

- Sterling rented an apartment unit operated by the Mayflower Hotel Corporation under a lease-like rental arrangement.
- Air conditioning was a promised amenity forming part of the rental bargain.
- For a substantial part of the warm season, the hotel failed to provide adequate air conditioning.
- Sterling remained in possession during the period of deficient service.
- Sterling sought damages or a rent abatement reflecting the reduced rental value caused by the missing amenity.

## Issues

1. Whether a tenant who remains in possession may recover damages or a rent abatement for a landlord’s failure to provide a promised service.
2. What measure of damages applies when the promised service is not provided during the tenancy.
3. Whether the tenant must present evidence enabling the fact-finder to quantify the diminution in rental value.

## Decision

- The court held that a tenant may remain in possession and still recover damages (or obtain a rent abatement) for the landlord’s failure to provide a contracted-for service.
- The proper measure of recovery is the difference between the rental value as promised (with the service) and the rental value as actually furnished (without the service) during the period of breach.
- Recovery requires competent evidence permitting a reasonable determination of that difference; subjective discomfort alone is insufficient to fix the amount.

## Legal Principles

- A landlord’s failure to provide a promised service may constitute a partial breach of the lease, supporting damages or rent abatement without requiring the tenant to vacate.
- In partial-breach service cases, damages are measured by diminution in rental value for the time the default continues (value as warranted minus value as delivered).
- The claimant bears the burden to prove diminution in value with competent, objective evidence sufficient for a reasonable estimate.

## Conclusion

The case recognizes rent abatement or damages for a tenant who stays in possession when a landlord fails to supply a promised amenity, but limits recovery to proven diminution in rental value rather than generalized complaints of discomfort.


Sterling v. Mayflower Hotel Corp., 93 A.2d 107 (D.C. 1952)