Eddy v. Anderson

Under ORS 90.130, “a tenant may elect to forego any remedy under the ‘essential services’ statute and to pursue a remedy under ORS 90.360(2) instead, the tenant nevertheless must act in ‘good faith.’”

Tenants appealed from the trial court’s determination to reject tenants’ counterclaims and award landlord most of the unpaid rent and damages that landlord sought. Tenants assigned error to the trial court’s dismissal of each of their counterclaims. On appeal, Tenants argued that their counterclaim for diminished rental value was erroneously dismissed because the trial court applied the “essential service” statute, which required Tenants to provide Landlord with notice of any repairs in order to seek damages, instead of allowing Tenants to seek damages under ORS 90.360(2), which did not require notice. Additionally, Tenants argued that because Landlord disposed of their “personal property” without providing them the statutorily required notice, Tenants’ could seek relief from the unpaid rent. In response, Landlord argued that the trial court properly determined that the case was about the Tenants not wanting to pay the “agreed-upon rent,” not any alleged deficiency by Landlord in his actions. Additionally, Landlord argued the “personal property” Tenants were referring to was garbage so the statute that granted them relief from paying the unpaid rent did not apply. Under ORS 90.130, “a tenant may elect to forego any remedy under the ‘essential services’ statute and to pursue a remedy under ORS 90.360(2) instead, the tenant nevertheless must act in ‘good faith.’” The Oregon Court of Appeals concluded that since Tenants acted in bad faith they could not pursue a remedy under a different statute than the “essential services” statute. The Court also concluded that since the property Tenants left behind was garbage, Landlord was not required to provide notice before disposing it.

Affirmed.