Your recipients will receive an email with this envelope shortly and will be able to access it on trellis. You can always see your envelopes by clicking the Inbox on the top right hand corner.
Your subscription has successfully been upgraded.
“A lease gives the right of possession of the property leased, and exclusive use or occupation of it for all purposes not prohibited by its terms.” (See Am. Coin-Meter of Colo. Springs, Inc. v. Poole (1972) 31 Colo. App. 316, 318, 503 P.2d 626, 627; People v. Cardenas (2014) 338 P.3d 430.)
“For example, a lease generally grants the tenant an exclusive right to possession of the whole property, which includes the right to exclude others, even the landlord.” (See Legro v. Robinson (2015) 369 P.3d 785, 790; Restatement (Second) of Property, Land. & Tenant § 1.2 cmt. a (1977).)
“A majority of jurisdictions recognize that a duty of care may arise from a landlord's agreement to make repairs.” (See Nordin v. Madden (2006) 148 P.3d 218, 220.)
“[T]he reservation of the right of inspection and the right of maintenance and repairs is generally not a sufficient attribute of control to support imposition of tort liability on the lessor for injuries to the tenant or third parties.” (See id; Wilson v. Marchiondo (2005) 124 P.3d 837, 840; Univ. of Denver v. Whitlock (1987) 744 P.2d 54; Lennon v. United States Theatre Corp. (1990) F.2d 996, 1001 [clauses assuring a right and opportunity to make repairs do not create a duty to make them].) ”
“[T]he covenant to repair gives the landlord a right to enter the premises, and hence amounts to a retention of a degree of control.” (See Nordin v. Madden (2006) 148 P.3d 218, 220.)
“A landlord is not a proper person to give consent to the search of his tenant's residence.” (See Condon v. People (1971) 176 Colo. 212, 219; Chapman v. United States (1961) 365 U.S. 610, 81 S.Ct. 776, 5 L.Ed.2d 828.)
“Despite maintaining an ownership interest in the property, landlords generally lack authority to consent to a search of their tenants' premises.” (See People v. Fuerst (2013) 302 P.3d 253, 259 n.2; Chapman v. United States (1961) 365 U.S. 610, 616–17, 81 S.Ct. 776, 5 L.Ed.2d 828.)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Please wait a moment while we load this page.