Shaneka Busby Baker v. Forrest Reggie Carr
05-16-00341-CV
| Tex. App. | Apr 28, 2017Background
- Baker leased a rural single-family home under a HUD rental-assistance program; lease required landlord (Carr) to provide lawn care.
- Lawn service mowed without incident for two years; beginning in 2014 scheduling conflicts and repeated confrontations between Baker and the lawn-service worker led the service to stop servicing the property.
- Landlord attempted to resolve scheduling complaints but stopped providing lawn care after the worker refused to return; Baker and family maintained the lawn thereafter and claimed resulting rodent problems in a storage building.
- In April 2015 Baker complained to the Housing Authority about lawn care, repairs, and rent; landlord mailed a certified nonrenewal notice on April 15, 2015 (lease expired Oct. 31, 2015).
- Baker sued in justice court (breach of contract, DTPA, retaliation, return of security deposit, repairs); justice court entered a take-nothing judgment; county court after a bench trial also entered a take-nothing judgment.
- On appeal Baker challenged retaliation, breach, discrimination/accommodation, security issues, security deposit, landlord access, and judicial bias; the appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Retaliation for complaint to Housing Authority | Baker: nonrenewal was retaliation for her complaint about landlord’s failures | Carr: nonrenewal was lawful notice at end of term; Baker held over after notice | Nonrenewal did not constitute retaliation; judgment for Carr affirmed |
| Breach of contract (lawn care, rodents) | Baker: landlord breached by failing to provide lawn care and address rodent infestation | Carr: he attempted performance but Baker’s conduct caused the lawn service to stop, excusing his further performance | Evidence supported trial court’s implied finding that Baker’s conduct prevented performance; claim rejected |
| Disability discrimination / reasonable accommodation | Baker: needed scheduled lawn care as accommodation for disabled children | Carr: (issue not raised below) | Not preserved for appeal; not considered |
| Security deposit / damages / access / security doors / judicial bias | Baker: landlord withheld deposit, failed to secure outbuilding, showed unit without consent, judge biased | Carr: disputed or noted issues not pleaded or not proven at trial | Claims not preserved or unsupported; all resolved against Baker |
Key Cases Cited
- Worford v. Stamper, 801 S.W.2d 108 (Tex. 1990) (if no findings requested, appellate court implies findings supporting judgment)
- City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802 (Tex. 2005) (standards for reviewing legal sufficiency of evidence)
- Dow Chemical Co. v. Francis, 46 S.W.3d 237 (Tex. 2001) (per curiam) (if some evidence supports finding, appellate court must uphold it; discuss review when no evidence supports finding)
- Berryman’s S. Fork, Inc. v. J. Baxter Brinkmann Int’l Corp., 418 S.W.3d 172 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2013) (performance under a contract may be excused when the other party prevents performance)