The "gentle readers" may be surprised by the analogy suggested between the reform of landlord-tenant law and the experience of Alice and the Queen. However, the events surrounding the enactment of Amended Substitute Senate Bill 103 were as perplexing as those in Lewis Carroll's story. Those opposing real reform, principally the real estate industry, were successful in weakening the proposed legislation. Consequently, the primary goal of the sponsors of landlord-tenant legislation in Ohio was not met by the legislation finally enacted. As this Article will demonstrate, the interpretation of the Act by the courts of Ohio has proven true the claims of some of the proponents of the reform legislation who likened the final enacted bill to the March Hare: a little bit late and somewhat confusing. The purpose of this Article is to review this legislation and its interpretation by the Ohio courts over the past thirteen years. Like Alice, the gentle reader may conclude that despite all this running, "everything's just as it was." For this reason, the authors will propose legislative amendments to the Act necessary to bring into more equitable balance the landlord-tenant relationship in Ohio.
Edward G. Kramer, Marilyn Tobocman, Kenneth J. Kowalski, and James Buchanan,
Ohio Landlord-Tenant Reform Revisited,
36 Clev. St. L. Rev.
available at https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/clevstlrev/vol36/iss2/3