St. John v. Cuyahoga Metro. Hous. Auth.

1

Lars St. John, Plaintiff, v. Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority, et al., Defendants.

No. 1:21CV2198

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio

January 26, 2024

MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER

PAMELA A. BARKER U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

This matter is before the Court upon the Motion for Summary Judgment of Defendants Adrienne Page, Cornell Grimes, and Tyshaune Harris (collectively, “Defendants”) filed on September 1, 2023. (Doc. No. 64.) Pro se Plaintiff Lars St. John (“Plaintiff” or “St. John”) filed a Brief in Opposition (Doc. No 66) on October 4, 2023, to which Defendants replied on October 18, 2023. (Doc. No. 70.) St. John thereafter filed a “Reply to Defendants' Reply Brief” (Doc. No 75) on November 3, 2023. On that same date, St. John also filed a Motion to Strike (Doc. No. 74), which Defendants have not opposed.

For the following reasons, St. John's Motion to Strike (Doc. No 74) is DENIED. Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 64) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, as set forth herein.

I. Facts

A. St. John's Lease at Beachcrest

In May 2018, St. John signed a one-year lease (the “Lease”) to become a tenant of Beachcrest, a high-rise apartment building operated by the Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing Authority (“CMHA”). (Deposition of Lars St. John (Doc. No. 61-1) at Tr. 27-28, 42, 44-45; Doc. No. 61-2.) Pursuant to the Lease, St. John was assigned Unit 314, which he testified is an efficiency unit on the third floor of the Beachcrest property. (St. John Depo. at Tr. 27- 28, 313.)

Article VIII of the Lease (entitled “Resident's Obligations”) contains several provisions that are relevant to the instant action. Paragraph D of Article VIII provides, in relevant part, that Residents are obligated to “abide by current CMHA administrative policies, regulations, and addenda thereto” and that “[v]iolation of these policies, regulations, or addenda is a violation of this Lease.” (Doc. No. 61-2 at PageID# 962; St. John Depo. at Tr. 50-51.) Paragraph E of Article VIII further provides, in relevant part, that Residents are obligated to “comply with all obligations imposed upon [them] by applicable provisions of state and local building or housing codes that materially affect the health and/or safety of [the] Resident, household members, neighbors, and/or CMHA employees.” (Id.)

Another provision in Article VIII directs Residents to “make no alteration, repair or redecoration to the unit or to the equipment therein, nor to install additional equipment . . . without CMHA's prior written consent.” (Doc. No. 61-2 at PageID# 964.) Article VIII also specifically prohibits Residents from “chang[ing] the locks or install[ing] new or additional locks on exterior doors.” (Doc. No. 61-2 at PageID# 964.) This section further provides that “[i]f CMHA cannot easily gain access to the building because of unauthorized locks, Resident will be charged for the additional costs that were incurred to gain such access.” (Id.)

Article XI of the Lease (entitled “Entry of Premises During Tenancy”) is also relevant to the instant action. (Doc. No. 61-2 at PageID# 968.) Paragraph A of this Article provides, in relevant part, as follows:

Resident agrees that a duly authorized CMHA agent, employee, or representative shall be permitted to enter Resident's unit during reasonable hours (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) to perform routine maintenance and/or inspections, …., to make repairs or improvements, or for any other necessary reason. Other than in emergency situations, CMHA will give forty-eight hour notice before it will enter the unit to affect [sic] the repairs. . . .

(Id.) Paragraph B of Article XI further provides that “CMHA shall give Resident at least a forty-eight-hour written notice of CMHA's intent to enter the unit” and that “[s]uch notice may be placed under Resident's door.” (Id.)

Lastly, the Lease contains an “Acknowledgement” Section that provides as follows:

Resident hereby agrees that all the provisions of this lease have been read and understood. Resident further agrees to be bound by its provisions and conditions as written. By signing part II of the lease, resident agrees to be bound by the conditions contained in part I and further said signature acknowledges receipt of a copy of part I and II of the lease.^[1]

(Doc. No. 61-2 at PageID# 975.) In his deposition, St. John acknowledged that he signed the Lease and that he received a copy of it.^[2] (St. John Depo. at Tr. 42, 71, 78.)

On March 5, 2019, St. John's Lease was recertified for an additional one-year period. (Doc. No. 61-2 at PageID# 981.) Pursuant to the recertification documentation, other than the monthly rent amount, all the terms and conditions of St. John's Lease remained the same. (Id.)

B. Bed Bug Procedure

On the same date that he signed his May 2018 Lease, St. John also acknowledged receipt of CMHA's “Bed Bug Procedure.” (St. John Depo. at Tr. 80; Doc. No. 61-3.) This Procedure provides, in relevant part, that “[i]t is important that all residents report any suspected bed bugs immediately to their Property Manager.” (Doc. No. 61-3 at PageID# 982.) The purpose of the Bed Bug Procedure is to “encourage all residents to immediately report any possible bed bug activity, and to comply with all obligations imposed upon Resident by applicable provisions of state and local building or housing codes that materially affect the health and/or safety” of Beachcrest's residents and CMHA employees. (Id.)

It is undisputed that bed bugs had been an issue at Beachcrest prior to May 2018 and continued to be an issue after St. John moved in, requiring regular bed bug inspections. (St. John Depo. at Tr. 86 -88.) St. John testified that he occasionally saw bed bugs in his Unit but that he never had an “infestation.” (Id. at Tr. 81-82, 89.)

C. CMHA's Unsuccessful Attempts to Access St. John's Unit

St. John testified that, at some point after moving into his Unit, he added a “key chain lock” to the door that he used to enter and exit his Unit. (St. John Depo. at Tr. 56.) St. John acknowledged that he never asked CMHA management for permission to install this chain lock.^[3] (Id. at Tr. 54, 56.)

In March 2019, St. John received a letter from CMHA informing him that “[w]e have made several attempts to reach you so we could access your apartment to replace your smoke detector.” (Doc. No. 61-5.) The letter reads that “[i]f we are not able to access your unit, we will remove the chain permanently off your door.” (Doc. No. 61-5; St. John Depo. at Tr. 105-106.) Two months later, in May 2019, St. John received a “Notice of Termination and Invitation to Explain” from then-Beachcrest manager Alyse Dismond. (Doc. No. 61-6 at PageID# 985; St. John Depo. at Tr. 112- 113.) The Notice provides, in relevant part, that “[t]he Management Office has received information that you have violated the Lease” because St. John denied the Site Manager access to his unit on May 20, 2019, for a “UPCS inspection” and on May 21, 2019, for a “Terminix inspection.” (Doc. No. 61-6 at PageID#s 985-86; St. John Depo. at Tr. 113-114.) St. John was given an opportunity to meet with management to reply on May 29, 2019, but the meeting did not occur. (Doc. No. 61-6 at PageID# 985; St. John Depo. at Tr. 113.) It is undisputed that CMHA did not terminate St. John's lease because of this Notice.

At some point in 2019, Defendant Adrienne Page (“Defendant Page” or “Page”) became the Beachcrest Site Manager. (Decl. of Adrienne Page (Doc. No. 64-1) at ¶ 2.) On November 14, 2019, Page sent an “Extermination Notice” to St. John, informing him that pest control would be coming to his Unit six days later (on November 20, 2019) for the prevention of bed bugs. (Doc. No. 61-7 at PageID# 987; St. John Depo. at Tr. 115-116.) The Notice further advised St. John to “make sure that an adult member is present at this time” and stated that “[i]f no one is present, Maintenance or Management/Exterminator will enter your home, in order to conduct this repair.” (Doc. No. 61-7.) St. John first testified that he was not home on November 20, 2019, but then clarified that he was home but “no one came out on that date.”^[4] (St. John Depo. at Tr. 120, 122.)

On November 22, 2019, CMHA attempted to conduct a bed bug inspection of St. John's Unit. (Page Decl. at ¶ 3; Declaration of Cornell Grimes (Doc. No. 64-2) at ¶ 3; Doc. No. 61-10 at PageID#s 990-91.)

The parties dispute what happened during this attempted inspection. According to St. John, he was not home when CMHA attempted to inspect his Unit on November 22, 2019. (St. John Depo. at Tr. 129, 133-134, 138.) To the contrary, St. John testified that left his Unit at 8:00 a.m. that day to run errands, including a visit to the post office, and did not return until “at least” 7:00 or 8:00 p.m. that night. (St. John Depo. at Tr. 134-135, 138.)

Defendant Cornell Grimes (“Officer Grimes”) was employed as a CMHA police officer at the time. According to a CMHA Police Incident Report, Officer Grimes provided a “general assist” at St. John's Unit at approximately 12:37 p.m. on November 22, 2019. (Doc. No. 61-10 at PageID# 990.) The Incident Report indicates that St. John was “refusing to open the door for maint[enance]” and that “mgmt. will try at a later time.” (Id. at PageID# 991.) In a subsequent Declaration Officer Grimes likewise avers that St. John “refused to open the door for maintenance to conduct a bed bug inspection” when they arrived at his Unit on November 22, 2019. (Grimes Decl. at ¶ 3.) Defendant Page also submitted a Declaration in which she avers that St. John was in his Unit on November 22, 2019, but “refused to open the door for maintenance.” (Page Decl. at ¶ 3.) The parties agree that, on November 22, 2019, CMHA left a tag on St. John's door labelled “Maintenance”...