Pittsburgh Landlords Sue City Over Eviction Moratorium

By Matthew Santoni
Law360 is providing free access to its coronavirus coverage to make sure all members of the legal community have accurate information in this time of uncertainty and change. Use the form below to sign up for any of our weekly newsletters. Signing up for any of our section newsletters will opt you in to the weekly Coronavirus briefing.

Sign up for our Pennsylvania newsletter

You must correct or enter the following before you can sign up:

Select more newsletters to receive for free [+] Show less [-]

Thank You!



Law360 (March 5, 2021, 3:20 PM EST) -- A group of landlords has sued the city of Pittsburgh in Pennsylvania state court over its recently passed moratorium on evictions during the pandemic, claiming that the City Council's ordinance forces landlords to stay in or renew contracts in violation of the state and U.S. constitutions.

The Landlord Service Bureau Inc., representing 4,200 landowners and property managers in and around Pittsburgh, said the city's extension of a federal eviction ban imposes requirements on businesses that are prohibited by state law.

"A landlord under this Eviction Regulation Ordinance … is prohibited from engaging in any contractual rights to terminate a lease and is forced to renew a lease" in violation of the state Landlord and Tenant Act of 1951, said the landlords' complaint, which was filed Thursday in the Court of Common Pleas for Allegheny County and made public Friday. "In effect, rental property owners in the city of Pittsburgh are forced to renew rental agreements with tenants, which is contrary to the most basic principles of contract law in that parties cannot be forced to continue contractual relationships."

The landlords asked the court for a declaration that the city's eviction moratorium was illegal and unconstitutional, and sought a court injunction barring the city from enforcing or implementing it.

The City Council passed an amendment to its business licensing ordinances on Tuesday that said landlords could not evict tenants during the pandemic without good cause, and landlords who wanted to toss someone out for being unsafe had to seek approval from the Pittsburgh Commission on Human Relations, the local civil rights board. The bill had not been signed by Mayor Bill Peduto as of Friday morning.

Another part of the bill said landlords couldn't terminate or refuse to extend a lease based solely on previous non-payment of rent. The bill said it would expire when the city lifted its emergency declaration related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The city eviction moratorium said it was intended to supplement, not replace, a federal moratorium from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which the landlords' complaint said was currently set to expire March 31. But the landlords said the federal moratorium should "preempt" the city's ordinance.

"The city of Pittsburgh is imposing regulations that well exceed the Centers for Disease Control order, by forcing landlords to renew leases, preventing the termination of leases and prohibiting the filing of actions for eviction," the complaint said. "The city is, therefore, violating the CDC moratorium order," the Landlord and Tenant Act of 1951, "and the rights of due process of law guaranteed by the Pennsylvania Constitution."

The landlords also claim that the eviction ban violated part of Pennsylvania's home rule charter law, which says municipalities can't place additional duties, responsibilities or requirements on businesses that aren't expressly provided by statewide laws.

"The eviction regulation ordinance explicitly places affirmative duties, responsibilities and requirements on rental property owners," the complaint said. "Pennsylvania courts have read … the home rule charter narrowly, and said charter explicitly prohibits the placement of affirmative duties on businesses."

Another part of the state constitution bars ex post facto laws that would retroactively affect existing contracts, which the landlords said applied to all leases that were in effect before the passage of the city eviction moratorium.

"You can't impair contracts like that... It basically puts landlords in a position that they have to renew leases for people they don't want to renew with," said John P. Corcoran Jr., representing the landlords. "The landlord community is concerned about its tenants, but there have to be protections."

A representative for the city declined to comment Friday. 

The Landlord Service Bureau is represented by John P. Corcoran Jr. of Jones Gregg Creehan & Gerace LLP.

Counsel information for the city was not immediately available.

The case is Landlord Service Bureau Inc. v. City of Pittsburgh et al., case number GD-21-001813, in the Court of Common Pleas for Allegheny County, Pennsylvania.

--Editing by Karin Roberts.

Update: This article has been updated with comments from the landlords' attorney.

For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.

Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Ask a question!