Condominium tenants sued their landlord for secondhand smoke that drifted into their unit despite efforts to seal their door and the operation of two HEPA air filters. The court found that secondhand smoke, under the proper circumstances, can be grounds for constructive eviction and allowed the tenants’ claims for constructive eviction and for breach of warranty of habitability to proceed. The court stated that secondhand smoke “is just as insidious and invasive as the more common conditions such as noxious odors, smoke odors, chemical fumes, excessive noise, and water leaks and extreme dust penetration.” Although the landlord argued that he had no control over the smoking tenants, the court found that the landlord could have asked the neighbors to stop smoking in the hallway and elevator; could have properly ventilated the smokers’ unit so that smoke did not seep into the other tenants’ unit; and could have taken action against the smoking tenants under the condominium bylaws.
An individual or organization may seek civil damages against a tobacco company based on the claim that the use of tobacco products causes disease or death. Some of these cases will relate to general tobacco products, while others will relate to specific subcategories of tobacco products--for example, light or low products, menthol or other flavored products. Additionally, there may be cases relating to exposure to secondhand smoke.
A claim for violating a law protecting tenants or home owners, such as the covenant of quiet enjoyment, the warranty of habitability, constructive eviction, or trespass. For example, a tenant could sue a neighbor or the property owner when exposed to drifting secondhand smoke in their home.
Condominium tenants sued their landlord for secondhand smoke that drifted into their unit despite efforts to seal their door and the operation of two HEPA air filters. The court found that secondhand smoke, under the proper circumstances, can be grounds for constructive eviction and allowed the tenants’ claims for constructive eviction and for breach of warranty of habitability to proceed. The court stated that secondhand smoke “is just as insidious and invasive as the more common conditions such as noxious odors, smoke odors, chemical fumes, excessive noise, and water leaks and extreme dust penetration.” Although the landlord argued that he had no control over the smoking tenants, the court found that the landlord could have asked the neighbors to stop smoking in the hallway and elevator; could have properly ventilated the smokers’ unit so that smoke did not seep into the other tenants’ unit; and could have taken action against the smoking tenants under the condominium bylaws.