428 S.W.3d 693
Mo. Ct. App.2014Background
- Bordeaux leased St. Louis residential property for ~$750/month; owner Santiseban sold the property 12 days after the lease to Shah. Plaintiff (Investors Alliance) later managed property and demanded rent beginning June 2012.
- Bordeaux stopped paying rent during the lease due to maintenance issues and did not pay Plaintiff for June–Nov 2012.
- Plaintiff sued under Chapter 535 for rent and possession; an associate judge awarded Plaintiff rent and possession; Bordeaux requested a trial de novo.
- At the de novo trial the court found Plaintiff failed to give the tenant the § 535.081 “adequate and timely” notice of transfer, but nevertheless held Plaintiff could recover unpaid rent under § 535.070.
- On appeal the court considered whether § 535.081’s notice requirement is mandatory and bars recovery of rent under § 535.070 when not complied with.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether failure to provide the § 535.081 notice defeats a purchaser’s claim for unpaid rent under § 535.070 | Notice is not an element of proof under § 535.090; failure to give notice does not bar rent recovery | § 535.081 makes notice a mandatory prerequisite to recovering rent under § 535.070; noncompliance precludes recovery | The notice requirement in § 535.081 is mandatory and a purchaser who fails to comply may not recover rent under § 535.070 |
Key Cases Cited
- Cooper v. Ratley, 916 S.W.2d 868 (Mo. Ct. App. 1996) (common-law rent claim; covenant to pay rent runs with the land; distinguished)
- Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30 (Mo. 1976) (standard of appellate review for court-tried cases)
- Anani v. Griep, 406 S.W.3d 479 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013) (statutory construction principles; legislative intent and plain meaning control)
- St. Louis Police Officers’ Ass’n v. Bd. of Police Comm’rs, 259 S.W.3d 526 (Mo. 2008) (interpretation that the word “shall” denotes a mandatory duty)