Limitations regarding the use of quotes
The quotes provided here reflect statements from a specific decision. Accordingly, the International Legal Consortium (ILC) cannot guarantee that an appellate court has not reversed a lower court decision which may influence the applicability or influence of a given quote. All quotes have been selected based on the subjective evaluations undertaken by the ILC meaning that quotes provided here may not accurately or comprehensively represent a given court’s opinion or conclusion, as such quotes may have originally appeared alongside other negative opinions or accompanying facts. Further, some quotes are derived from unofficial English translations, which may alter their original meaning. We emphasize the need to review the original decision and related decisions before authoritatively relying on quotes. Using quotes provided here should not be construed as legal advice and is not intended to be a substitute for legal counsel on any subject matter in any jurisdiction. Please see the full limitations at https://www.tobaccocontrollaws.org/about.
A tenant in a two-unit rental home complained of secondhand smoke drifting from the downstairs unit, which was occupied by the building’s owner. After moving out, the tenant sued the owner to end the lease and to recover his security deposit, claiming that the owner’s smoking violated the covenant of quiet enjoyment. A trial court found in favor of the owner and dismissed the tenant’s claim. The court of appeal disagreed and ruled that reasonable minds could differ about whether the drifting smoke violated the covenant of quiet enjoyment. The court sent the case back to the lower court for further proceedings.