Williams Ex Rel. Williams v. Strauss

185 S.E. 676, 210 N.C. 200, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 56
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided May 20, 1936·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The judgment in this action is in accord with the law in this State as declared and applied by this Court in Mortgage Co. v. Massie, 209 N. C., 146; Salter v. Gordon, 200 N. C., 381, 157 S. E., 11; Tucker v. Yarn Mill, 194 N. C., 756, 140 S. E., 744; and Fields v. Ogburn, 178 N. C., 407, 100 S. E., 583. In the last cited case it is said: “In the absence of express stipulation on the subject, there is usually no obligation or assurance on the part of the landlord to his tenant that the premises will be kept in repair, or that the same are fit or suitable for the purposes for which they are rented.”

No facts are shown by the evidence in the instant case which bring this case within any recognized exception to the general rule as to the liability of a landlord to a tenant for damages resulting from defects in the premises. The general rule is that the landlord is not liable for such damages. The judgment is

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Williams Ex Rel. Williams v. Strauss, 185 S.E. 676, 210 N.C. 200, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 56 (N.C. 1936).

185 S.E. 676 (Williams Ex Rel. Williams v. Strauss) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Peoples v. Fulk
220 N.C. 635 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1942)
Livingston v. . Investment Co.
14 S.E.2d 489 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1941)
Livingston v. Essex Investment Co.
219 N.C. 416 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1941)
Wellons v. . Sherrin
8 S.E.2d 820 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1940)
Wilson v. . Dowtin
2 S.E.2d 576 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1939)