Law, College of
Nebraska Law Bulletin (Selected Issues)
Date of this Version
10-8-2019
Document Type
Article
Citation
Nebraska Law Bulletin (October 8, 2019)
Abstract
Nebraska’s case law on security deposits is sparse, leaving its security deposit statute relatively untouched, and ripe for interpretation. Nebraska should follow the lead of Iowa and Ohio courts to find that such provisions are unenforceable because they reduce the landlord’s burden of providing an itemization of damages that justifies the money withheld. And, while freedom of contract should generally be supported, as seen in Indiana, landlords should not be able to contractually demand that tenants return a dwelling unit in the same or better condition as when they took possession.
Nebraska’s landlord-tenant statutes should ultimately be interpreted to bar automatic carpet cleaning provisions. The courts should point to the plain language of the statutes, which permit tenants to return a dwelling unit in a condition of ordinary wear and tear. Courts should also emphasize the statutory requirement that landlords prove damages stemming from noncompliance with the rental agreement or the law in order to properly withhold security deposits. To uphold the plain meaning of the statutes and the Legislature’s intent, Nebraska courts should conclude that automatic carpet cleaning provisions are unenforceable when presented with the issue.
Comments
Copyright 2019, the author