In Christie v Fick, a recent unpublished Michigan Court of Appeals case (March 2, 2010, No.285924), the Court was asked to review whether a tenant alleging violation of Michigan’s Anti-Lockout Statute (MCL 600.2918) was entitled to exemplary damages.
The Anti-Lockout Statute specifically states that “any tenant in possession of premises whose possessory interest has been unlawfully interfered with by the owner, lessor, licensor, or their agents shall be entitled to recover the amount of his actual damages or $200.00, whichever is greater, for each occurrence and, where possession has been lost, to recover possession.” (emphasis added). This statute prohibits a landlord from attempting self-help eviction of a tenant, or eviction without legal process.
In Christie, plaintiff tenant filed a complaint alleging that defendant landlord unlawfully locked them out of the rental premises and also moved a large quantity of valuable equipment from the rental premises to storage, where it was subsequently damaged. Defendants argued that the plaintiffs were behind in rent, the plaintiffs had abandoned the premises, and that plaintiffs had numerous opportunities to retrieve their personal property after it was moved.
At trial, the court gave the jury an instruction regarding the award of exemplary damages. Specifically, the jury was instructed that “an award of exemplary damages is proper if it compensates a plaintiff for humiliation, sense of outrage, and indignity resulting from injustices maliciously, willfully, and wantonly inflicted by the defendant.” After a jury found for plaintiffs and against defendants on plaintiffs’ claim for violation of the anti-lockout statute, MCL 600.2918, they awarded plaintiffs treble damages for the anti-lockout claim, or three times the actual damages amount.
Defendants appealed on this issue, arguing that a statutorily based cause of action will not allow for damages other than those specified in the statute. Exemplary damages are not specifically provided for in the Anti-Lockout Statute.
Although Michigan Court of Appeals in Christie agreed with Defendants argument, it did not reverse the ruling. The Court reasoned that, under Michigan law, recovery under the Anti-Lockout Statute may include damages for emotional distress, embarrassment, and humiliation, as part of actual damages. Therefore, although a separate award for exemplary damages is not appropriate in a statutorily based action unless the statute in question specifically provides for such damage, damages for mental distress are allowable as part of a plaintiff’s actual damages. As a result, the Court allowed plaintiffs to recover the damages awarded as emotional distress damages under the Anti-Lockout Statute.
This article was written by Natalie C. Najarian, Associate at Demorest Law Firm.
