Birnberg Minnesota Legislative Newsletter

When the only adult tenant dies (or all adult tenants die together) without a will, he usually leaves behind not just a lot of personalty – furniture, pots and pans, etc – but a legal headache for the landlord who wants to obey the law but also wants to re-rent the apartment as soon as possible. If there are no known heirs or an unreachable heir or competing heirs, the problems compound. Heirs also might have problems. As discussed here, there are gaps in the law making it unclear what steps the landlord or the heirs can take, especially rapid steps. This essay also proposes possible legislative fixes for the problems.

By Paul Birnberg, paulrainerbirnberg@gmail.com

When a residential tenant moves out at the end of the lease and gives the landlord a delivery address the landlord has a three-week deadline under Minn. Stat. § 504B.178 to return or account for the security deposit. Most practitioners, including tenant advocates, have assumed that the three-week clock starts after both of the following two things have happened — the tenancy has terminated and the landlord has received the delivery address.

On June 17, in an unpublished case but one of first impression, Mungall v. Garry, the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled that the landlords missed the deadline when they waited exactly three weeks (21 days) after receiving the tenant’s delivery address but 26 days after the termination of her tenancy.

As discussed at length here (with four appendices) I believe the court was wrong. Its construction of section 504B.178 leads to illogical results and flies in the face of the statute’s legislative history. The clock should not start until 21 days after both of the following have occurred: the tenancy terminated AND the tenant gave the landlord delivery instructions for return of the deposit.

The appendices are here: Appendix 1 , Appendix 2 , Appendix 3 , Appendix 4

Originally posted 7/22/2019

By Paul Birnberg, paulrainerbirnberg@gmail.com

Unscrupulous landlords gouge residential tenants by unfairly keeping their security deposits. What laws in the fifty states plus D.C. are available to protect these tenants? How does Minnesota stack up against the other states? Two tables, Chart 1 and Chart 2, summarize the laws in the 51 jurisdictions. As discussed here, with the exception of attorney fees, on most issues Minnesota falls on the pro-tenant side of the spectrum but not at the very end of the spectrum.

By Paul Birnberg, paulrainerbirnberg@gmail.com

A recent case, Denzer v. Dolan, Minn. Ct. App. File No. A18-0645 (Nov. 26, 2018), review denied (Minn. Feb. 19, 2019), illustrates gaps in both a lockout statute and associated pro-se forms. As discussed here, Minn. Stat. § 504B.375, usually thought to provide for attorney fees, actually limits attorney fees only to an unusual situation. Most pro-se form petitions steer locked-out tenants away from two common claims that should be added to any 504B.375 petition.

By Paul Birnberg, paulrainerbirnberg@gmail.com

Licensors of licensees who have overstayed their welcome don’t have a simple or clear path to legally remove them. The classic case is the adult child who is living for free in his parents home but won’t leave. As discussed here, amending the eviction-action (“unlawful-detainer”) statute Minn. Stat. § 504B.285 to allow housing courts to hear such disputes would make sense as well as provide bright-lines rules for the steps required to evict licensees.

By Paul Birnberg, paulrainerbirnberg@gmail.com

As discussed here, from 1984 to 2008, when a tenant’s landlord was foreclosed, the tenant’s lease was cancelled but the new owner (the foreclosing lender) had to give the tenant one-month notice of termination. From 2008 to 2011, that notice period was extended to two months. Starting in 2011 residential tenants got considerably more protection but commercial tenants lost all their protection as an unintended consequence of the way the new residential-tenant statute was written. The two-month protection for commercial tenants should be restored.

By Paul Birnberg, paulrainerbirnberg@gmail.com

When a tenant’s building may or may not have transferred ownership, the tenant has no good way to safely pay his rent to the correct landlord. A new Rent Escrow for Competing Landlords Statute would solve this problem, as discussed here.

By Paul Birnberg, paulrainerbirnberg@gmail.com

As discussed here, Minn. Stat. § 504B.401 allows service on the landlord of a TRA by posting on the tenant’s door and mailing to the landlord by certified mail. It also requires “due diligence” without saying what that entails. Changing section 504B.401 to closely track the more sensible Minn. Stat. § 504B.331 would make good sense.

By Paul Birnberg, paulrainerbirnberg@gmail.com

On January 24, the Senate Judiciary Committee passed out Senate File 125. Its companion bill, HF 495 was introduced on January 28.

The bill is a mixture of three parts. This blog only covers sections 1-2, the first part of the bill, which modify Minn. Stat. § 504B.111 and create a new Minn. Stat. § 504B.146. Section 1 requires residential leases for buildings with at least twelve units to identify the specific unit being rented. Section 2 requires residential leases ending in the middle of a month to disclose that on the first page of the lease, to disclose if rent is prorated for that partial month and if so how.

As discussed here, the bill helps deal with problems in a fair number of leases, especially in college neighborhoods, but has some drafting issues.