Understanding the Defense of Landlord Retaliation in Minnesota Evictions

 

What is the Retaliation Defense in Minnesota Evictions?

A common defense raised by tenants in eviction cases is the defense of landlord retaliation. Minnesota law prohibits landlords from evicting a tenant where the eviction is meant as retaliation for the tenant’s good faith complaint or attempt to assert their rights under Minnesota law, or a lease agreement. This may seem straightforward at first glance, but in many cases it can become quite complex.

Retaliation For Complaint of a Landlord Violation

The first complexity in the retaliation defense is that multiple Minnesota laws apply to this defense. First, Minnesota Statutes Section 504B.441 prohibits landlords from penalizing a tenant for the tenant’s “complaint of a violation.” This provision may seem broad to landlords considering whether to evict a tenant. The provision truly does encompass a wide range of complaints and can include code violations, lease violations, or even violations of the landlord’s duty to keep the residential property in habitable condition.

Even more troubling for Minnesota landlords attempting to evict a tenant, Minnesota law requires that landlords prove that their eviction is not retaliatory if it is filed within 90 days of the tenant’s complaint. If the eviction court judge decides that the eviction was brought in retaliation for the complaint, or that the landlord did not prove otherwise if it was within the 90 day period, the judge will dismiss the eviction case. This can be extraordinarily frustrating for landlords who are evicting for non-retaliatory reasons yet have received an unrelated complaint from the tenant. It is very important for landlords in these situations to retain an experienced Minnesota eviction attorney to advise them in addressing such a defense.

Retaliatory Notice to Vacate

Similar to the provisions of Section 504B.441, Minnesota law prohibits a landlord from giving a tenant a notice to vacate or notice to quit the property, where that notice is retaliatory. Specifically, Minnesota Statutes Section 504B.285 provides that landlord may not give a tenant a notice to vacate if that notice is:

  • Intended in whole or part as a penalty for the tenant’s good-faith attempt to secure their rights under their lease;

  • Intended in whole or part as a penalty for the tenant’s good faith attempt to secure their rights under Minnesota or United States law; or

  • Intended as a penalty for the tenant’s for the tenant’s report of a health, safety, housing, or building code violation.

Similar to Section 504B.441, Section 504B.285 places the burden of proving that the notice was not retaliatory on the landlord if the notice was provided within 90 days of an applicable action by the tenant. The Minnesota Supreme Court has also addressed this statute in its important decision in the case Parkin v. Fitzgerald. In Parkin, the Minnesota Supreme Court expanded its interpretation of this provision more broadly, and reiterated how the burden of proving that an eviction is non-retaliatory can be placed on the landlord. This Minnesota legal provision is arguably even more broad than Section 504B.441, and can create enormous headaches for landlords attempting to evict a tenant.

If a landlord believes that a tenant may raise a defense of retaliation under this statute, it is very important for the landlord to retain an experienced eviction notice attorney prior to providing the tenant a notice to vacate or notice to quit. If the tenant successfully establishes the retaliation defense under this statute, the eviction court judge will dismiss the eviction.

Eviction Notice Attorneys in Minnesota

While facing the defense of retaliation can be daunting for landlords, the Roseville, Minnesota based eviction attorneys at RAM Law PLLC have experience dealing with, and prevailing, against such defenses raised by tenants. Any landlord who is involved in an eviction case where the retaliation defense may be raised should call our attorneys now for a free consultation about their case.