Housing Authority of Chester County v. Pappas
2013 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 506
| Pennsylvania Court of Common P... | 2013Background
- Defendant Kenneth J. Pappas signed a written Lease (with Housekeeping Addendum) with the Housing Authority of Chester County for an independent‑living apartment. The Lease required tenants to keep premises clean, report repair needs, and provided termination grounds for serious or repeated material violations.
- The Housing Authority conducted multiple UPCS/housekeeping inspections showing repeated, serious violations (December 6, 2010; June 13, 2011; August 1, 2011; November 18, 2011; December 14, 2011), documented by photographs (e.g., excessive clutter, blocked egress with cardboard, car parts stored inside, inoperable GFI outlets, dirty clothing in kitchen, unreported maintenance needs).
- Housing Authority sent a detailed notice to quit on August 25, 2011 identifying repeated material violations and directing defendant to vacate by September 26, 2011; defendant neither used the Lease grievance procedure nor vacated.
- Landlord‑tenant proceedings followed (district court awarded possession, rent, and costs); defendant appealed and the present bench trial was held October 24, 2013.
- The trial record included testimony from the Housing Authority director and over 100 photographs; defendant did not dispute the inspectors’ factual findings but argued (1) the Authority filed suit too soon by relying on a December 12, 2011 letter and (2) the breaches were not material or should be excused due to his condition.
- The court concluded the August 25, 2011 notice to quit was valid, the violations were serious and repeated material breaches of the Lease and Housekeeping Addendum, and awarded possession and costs (but declined to award attorneys’ fees).
Issues
| Issue | Housing Authority's Position | Pappas's Position | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity / timing of notice to quit | August 25, 2011 notice complied with state and federal requirements; notices may run concurrently; suit timely. | Argued December 12, 2011 letter was controlling and Authority failed to wait required period before filing (i.e., notices should have run consecutively). | Notice of Aug 25, 2011 was valid; letters were independent; court had jurisdiction and suit was timely. |
| Materiality of lease violations | Repeated L‑3 and housekeeping violations (clutter, blocked egress, car parts, unsafe appliances, failure to report repairs) are serious/material and justify termination. | Admitted untidiness but argued breaches were not material or serious enough to terminate lease. | Violations were serious and repeated material breaches of Paragraph 7 and Housekeeping Addendum; termination upheld. |
| Disability / accommodation defense | No evidence defendant requested reasonable accommodation; Lease required tenant to report needed repairs and meet housekeeping standards. | Suggested physical condition excused performance and supported by requests for admission. | Court excluded disability evidence by prior limine order; no evidence of requested/denied accommodation; defense fails. |
| Attorneys' fees | Sought costs and attorneys’ fees under Lease. | Opposed (argued fees not warranted). | Costs awarded but attorneys’ fees denied — Lease fee provisions apply to rent‑collection/are permissive and do not mandate fees here. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bayne v. Smith, 965 A.2d 265 (Pa. Super. 2009) (applies contract principles to residential leases)
- Pugh v. Holmes, 384 A.2d 1234 (Pa. Super. 1978) (residential lease contract principles), aff'd, 405 A.2d 897 (Pa. 1979)
- Lackner v. Glosser, 892 A.2d 21 (Pa. Super. 2006) (elements of breach of contract)
- Gorski v. Smith, 812 A.2d 683 (Pa. Super. 2002) (contract standards)
- Ringgold Sch. Dist. v. Abramski, 426 A.2d 707 (Pa. Commw. 1981) (definition of breach of contract)
- Pittsburgh Constr. Co. v. Griffith, 834 A.2d 572 (Pa. Super. 2003) (purpose of contract damages)
- Birth Ctr. v. St. Paul Co., Inc., 787 A.2d 376 (Pa. 2001) (contract damages principles)
- Alleghany Co. Housing Auth. v. Johnson, 908 A.2d 336 (Pa. Super. 2006) (serious/material housing authority lease violations support eviction)
- Stimmler v. Chestnut Hill Hosp., 981 A.2d 145 (Pa. 2009) (treatment of deemed admissions when answers are late)
- Lebanon County Housing Auth. v. Landek, 967 A.2d 1009 (Pa. Super. 2009) (reasonable‑accommodation defense requires a request for accommodation)