Monday, October 13, 2008
Ind. Decisions - More on: Upcoming oral arguments this week
Updating this ILB entry from earlier this morning, the IU News Room has now posted a release on the Supreme Court oral argument in the case of Stanley Klotz v. Sarah Hoyt & Chrissy Kornmann, to be heard Thursday at the Bloomington Law School. Some quotes:
BLOOMINGTON, Ind. -- The Indiana Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Thursday (Oct. 16) in a case relevant to many college students who rent their homes or apartments. Arguments will begin at noon in the Moot Court Room at the Indiana University School of Law--Bloomington.
Klotz v. Hoyt, the case to be argued, is a landlord-tenant dispute over the payment of back rent and the return of the tenant's security deposit. * * *
[The case] originated in Muncie, when two women rented an apartment from landlord Stan Klotz.
The only roommates -- Sarah Hoyt and Chrissy Kornmann -- signed a one-year lease in June 2006, but paid rent only for the first six weeks of the lease. Due to personal disagreements, the two tenants vacated the apartment without notifying Klotz. After the tenants vacated, Klotz found damage to the apartment, as well as furniture that had been left behind. Klotz attempted to notify both tenants of his intention to begin eviction proceedings, but received no response to his letters.
In January 2007, Klotz filed a complaint seeking immediate possession of the residence and damages in the amount of approximately $10,000.
A trial court evicted Hoyt and Kornmann three weeks later, with Klotz agreeing not to request damages over $6,000, the maximum allowed in small claims court. Hoyt filed a petition for the return of her security deposit and her property that she'd left behind in the residence, arguing that more than 45 days had passed since her eviction, with Klotz failing to send her an itemized list of damages that would warrant the forfeiture of her security deposit. * * *
The Delaware County Circuit Court found in favor of the tenants in April 2007. The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed the decision in February 2008, ruling that the 45-day window for a landlord to present the tenants a list of itemized damages began when the trial court entered an order of eviction against the tenants, not earlier, when Klotz first informed the tenants of his intent to seek an eviction order. The Supreme Court has granted a petition to transfer and has assumed jurisdiction over the case.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on October 13, 2008 01:54 PM
Posted to Upcoming Oral Arguments