Legal question about roommate's property?

Question

The question appears at the end.

Order of events:

Heard a noise at 6:30AM and saw a lot of water leaking from the ceiling onto the carpet in the hallway. Quickly grabbed a pot from the kitchen and put it under the leak. Quickly contacted landlord to fix the leak. Leak fixed quickly.

Facts:

1. The pot was my roommate's and I do not own any pots or large empty containers.

2. AFTER the leak was fixed, we found out that the water came from an overflowed toilet upstairs (I live in an apartment).

3.My roommate demanded that I pay $20 to replace the pot (the leaking water was overflowed toilet water).

4. My roommate and I are in separate rooms so I didn't wake him up because I thought he would be angry for waking him up so early over a trivial thing such as a leak.

Am I legally responsible for paying for the pot? Why or why not? Should I only offer to clean it with boiling water and soap and refuse to replace it? Please come to your conclusion only from the law and NOT from morals, etiquette, or personal opinions.

Answer 1

It is your roommate's burden of proof that the pot was damaged by some toilet water.  Let him or her sue you.  I do not think it will fly.  Plus the cost of the suit is way out of proportion to the claimed damages.  Tell your roommate to grow up.  He/she is a jerk.  Boil out the pot and wash it.

Answer 2

Well, by law he stills owns the pot.  I'm sure it was in the apartment to be used by both of you and nothing is in writing on what it is suppose to be used for.

Get another room mate....  

Answer 3

What was the agreement of your roomates items?  For example, if no leak was detected, are you allowed to use the pot for cooking while he is not present?

The pot was not damaged.  Granted, it was toilet water, but all you have to do is boil hot water and that gets rid of the bacteria.

Answer 4

I'm a 2nd year law student, and I'm going to treat this more seriously than I should. Besides, my opinion is just that, in the sense that I won't be responsible for mistating law, etc. Your question is as much one of tort law as property rights.

Basically, you (allegedly) ruined someone's property. Taken by itself, you are liable. However, you have a defense of private necessity, in that if you hadn't done it, worse damage would develop to private property (even this defense is not complete escape, it depends on a lot more than I can go into here). He has two replies: First, you had the ability to pick something else to use, and Second, if you hadn't ruined his pot, and let the damage occur, insurance would have paid it, and he would still have a pot.

Your reply to the first depends on whether you were actually forced to use his pot by circumstances. Your reply to the second is that it is unreasonable to allow that much damage to save a stupid pot.

Legal conclusion: it depends on your state's public policy, and how the judge feels. My prediction is that for such a small case, the judge would use a public/social policy finding. Basically, the pot saved property that is common to both of you, therefore you share in the loss. Probably split down the middle, $10 each.

That is, assuming it is an actual loss. But if your roommate says it's a loss to him, most courts would accept that (making him eat out of a toilet pot could be "Outrageous Conduct."). If you compensate him for the pot, you should be able to keep the "damaged" one.

Answer 5

well from my point of view you should clean it and tell him to get over it because its just a pot... but if you want a legal point of view it was his pot and you didn't have permission to use it... but if no damage was done to the pot you would most likely win the the case... but since it is just a pot i would go out and just buy him another pot for $20 its quicker and as soon as you buy it its done and he can't sew you haha