<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mollykins2:
I own a small gift shop in Wisconsin. My lease ran from March 1999 to March 2000. In December 1999 I decided to move to a larger shop. I gave notice to the landlord and said that I would continue to pay rent until my lease was complete. (It is a small town and I didn't want to ruin my good reputation) They asked if they could find a new tenant, would it be ok to rent it out. I agreed, thinking this would break my lease. After paying March rent, I found out that a new tenant had been in the shop since Feb. I then cancelled my check for March. Now my landlord will not return my security deposit and February rent, stating that I broke the lease agreement. I think that they broke it by re-renting it and trying to charge both of us rent. Is there anything that I can do? Thank you for any help.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
My response:
Here are your State's landlord / tenant laws.
Your landlord is "dead wrong."
Read the following carefully and don't be put off as you read, because these laws were written from the Landlord rights perspective. So, read carefully because you'll read just what your landlord did wrong - i.e., being "double paid." Go get 'em.
Wisconsin Statutes:
704.29 Recovery of rent and damages by landlord; mitigation.
704.29(1)
(1) Scope of section. If a tenant unjustifiably removes from the premises prior to the effective date for termination of the tenant's tenancy and defaults in payment of rent, or if the tenant is removed for failure to pay rent or any other breach of a lease, the landlord can recover rent and damages except amounts which the landlord could mitigate in accordance with this section, unless the landlord has expressly agreed to accept a surrender of the premises and end the tenant's liability. Except as the context may indicate otherwise, this section applies to the liability of a tenant under a lease, a periodic tenant, or an assignee of either.
704.29(2)
(2) Measure of recovery. In any claim against a tenant for rent and damages, or for either, the amount of recovery is reduced by the net rent obtainable by reasonable efforts to rerent the premises. Reasonable efforts mean those steps which the landlord would have taken to rent the premises if they had been vacated in due course, provided that such steps are in accordance with local rental practice for similar properties. In the absence of proof that greater net rent is obtainable by reasonable efforts to rerent the premises, the tenant is credited with rent actually received under a rerental agreement minus expenses incurred as a reasonable incident of acts under sub. (4), including a fair proportion of any cost of remodeling or other capital improvements. In any case the landlord can recover, in addition to rent and other elements of damage, all reasonable expenses of listing and advertising incurred in rerenting and attempting to rerent (except as taken into account in computing the net rent under the preceding sentence). If the landlord has used the premises as part of reasonable efforts to rerent, under sub. (4) (c), the tenant is credited with the reasonable value of the use of the premises, which is presumed to be equal to the rent recoverable from the defendant unless the landlord proves otherwise. If the landlord has other similar premises for rent and receives an offer from a prospective tenant not obtained by the defendant, it is reasonable for the landlord to rent the other premises for the landlord's own account in preference to those vacated by the defaulting tenant.
704.29(3)
(3) Burden of proof. The landlord must allege and prove that the landlord has made efforts to comply with this section. The tenant has the burden of proving that the efforts of the landlord were not reasonable, that the landlord's refusal of any offer to rent the premises or a part thereof was not reasonable, that any terms and conditions upon which the landlord has in fact rerented were not reasonable, and that any temporary use by the landlord was not part of reasonable efforts to mitigate in accordance with sub. (4) (c); the tenant also has the burden of proving the amount that could have been obtained by reasonable efforts to mitigate by rerenting.
704.29(4)
(4) Acts privileged in mitigation of rent or damages. The following acts by the landlord do not defeat the landlord's right to recover rent and damages and do not constitute an acceptance of surrender of the premises:
704.29(4)(a)
(a) Entry, with or without notice, for the purpose of inspecting, preserving, repairing, remodeling and showing the premises;
704.29(4)(b)
(b) Rerenting the premises or a part thereof, with or without notice, with rent applied against the damages caused by the original tenant and in reduction of rent accruing under the original lease;
704.29(4)(c)
(c) Use of the premises by the landlord until such time as rerenting at a reasonable rent is practical, not to exceed one year, if the landlord gives prompt written notice to the tenant that the landlord is using the premises pursuant to this section and that the landlord will credit the tenant with the reasonable value of the use of the premises to the landlord for such a period;
704.29(4)(d)
(d) Any other act which is reasonably subject to interpretation as being in mitigation of rent or damages and which does not unequivocally demonstrate an intent to release the defaulting tenant.
704.29 - ANNOT.
History: 1993 a. 486.
704.29 - ANNOT.
Sale of property constituted acceptance of surrender of premises and termination of lease. First Wis. Trust Co. v. L. Wiemann Co. 93 Wis. 2d 258, 286 N.W.2d 360 (1980).
704.29 - ANNOT.
Court's retention of jurisdiction to determine damages for rents not yet due is permitted. Mitigation expenses which may be recovered are limited to necessary expenses incurred and does not include compensation for time spent in mitigating damages. Kersten v. H.C. Prange Co. 186 Wis. 2d 49, 520 NW(2d) 99 (Ct. App. 1994).
704.29 - ANNOT.
Landlord has obligation to rerent when tenant breaches lease; specific performance is not proper remedy. Chi-Mil. Corp. v. W. T. Grant Co. 422 F. Supp. 46.
704.31
704.31 Remedy on default in long terms; improvements.
704.31(1)
(1) If there is a default in the conditions in any lease or a breach of the covenants thereof and such lease provides for a term of 30 years or more and requires the tenant to erect or construct improvements or buildings upon the land demised at the tenant's own cost and exceeding in value the sum of $50,000, and such improvements have been made and the landlord desires to terminate the lease and recover possession of the property described therein freed from all liens, claims or demands of such lessee, the landlord may, in case of any breach or default, commence an action against the tenant and all persons claiming under the tenant to recover the possession of the premises leased and proceed in all respects as if the action was brought under the statute to foreclose a mortgage upon real estate, except that no sale of the premises shall be ordered.
704.31(2)
(2) The judgment shall determine the breach or default complained of, fix the amount due the landlord at such time, and state the several amounts to become due within one year from the entry thereof, and provide that unless the amount adjudged to be due from the tenant, with interest thereon as provided in the lease or by law, shall be paid to the landlord within one year from the entry thereof and the tenant shall, within such period, fully comply with the judgment requiring the tenant to make good any default in the conditions of the lease, that the tenant and those claiming under the tenant shall be forever barred and foreclosed of any title or interest in the premises described in the lease and that in default of payment thereof within one year from the entry of the judgment the tenant shall be personally liable for the amount thereof. During the one-year period ensuing
