TTTBE #47: Early Answer for Patrons!
Added 2017-10-29 21:11:03 +0000 UTCThis question asked whether landlords generally have immunity from suit from their tenants. Most people properly assumed that no, they don't. But -- as always with the bar exam -- the real question is "why?"
So we can eliminate both "C" and "D" right off the bat. Answer "C" says that the common law rule is "lessee beware" and that property is generally rented "as is"; that's no longer true. Similarly, answer "D" says that landlords cannot be liable for negligence in maintaining the property.
Although that's no longer the case, you may be shocked to discover that the modern rule superseding the doctrine of landlord immunity is less than 50 years old. It wasn't until the 1970s that courts first began to recognize that landlords have a duty, sounding in negligence, to maintain apartment premises and common areas. One of the earliest cases to so hold -- one that tracks the fact pattern of this question -- is Sargent v. Ross, 308 A.2d 528 (N.H. 1973).
Answer "A" is wrong because it suggests that landlords are strictly liable for conditions in leased premises. If that were the case, then literally anything that happened to you in an apartment building would be your landlord's fault, even if you were skateboarding down the railing while juggling flaming chainsaws.
That leaves answer "B," which says that landlords have a duty of care to protect their tenants from foreseeable risk of harm.
Thomas got this answer correct and is now 27-for-47 (57.4%) and is once again on a three-question winning streak.
