Original in-game verdict

Background 1. This is a small-claims contract dispute about a $150 cleaning charge taken by Cedar Key Rentals LLC from Evan Mercer after move-out. 2. The parties agree that the lease contained a cleaning-fee clause. The dispute is whether the condition for that fee happened: whether the apartment was returned in reasonably clean condition. 3. Evan Mercer asks for return of the $150 and court costs. Cedar Key asks that the refund be denied, or at most reduced, because it says the photos do not show every area of the apartment. Issues for determination 4. The court must decide: (a) whether the lease allowed a $150 cleaning fee only if the unit was not reasonably clean; (b) whether Cedar Key proved the apartment was not returned in reasonably clean condition; and (c) whether Evan Mercer proved entitlement to a refund of the $150 charge. Submissions of the parties 5. Evan Mercer says he cleaned the apartment before returning the keys, took photos on move-out day, and those photos show a reasonably clean apartment. He says the lease required only reasonable cleanliness, not professional cleaning. 6. Cedar Key says the lease allowed the fee if the apartment was not returned in reasonably clean condition. It argues that Evan’s photos do not show every area, especially the inside of the oven, and therefore do not prove the apartment was clean enough. Cedar Key candidly acknowledged that its record does not include a room-by-room list or a detailed invoice of every task. Evidence and findings 7. The signed lease clause is the strongest written evidence in the record. It states that Cedar Key may deduct a $150 cleaning fee if the tenant fails to return the unit in reasonably clean condition. That term is established. 8. The lease clause does not itself prove that the fee was properly taken. It only sets the condition that must be met before the fee can be charged. 9. Evan’s submissions and photos support his account that he cleaned the apartment and believed it was reasonably clean at move-out. Those materials are not perfect proof of every corner of the apartment, but they are direct evidence from the move-out day. 10. Cedar Key’s response is that the photos do not show every area, especially the oven. That point creates some uncertainty, but uncertainty is not the same as proof. Cedar Key did not identify a specific dirty condition with enough detail to show that the apartment failed the lease standard. 11. Cedar Key also said its invoice does not itemize the exact cleaning tasks. The court gives that admission weight. It means the record does not contain a detailed, reliable explanation of what cleaning was supposedly needed or why the amount was justified. 12. On this record, Cedar Key did not carry the burden of proving the condition that would allow the fee. The remaining gap is not a reason to keep the money; it is a reason to find the charge unproven. 13. Evan, as the party asking for the refund, also had to show why the fee should be returned. He did so by pointing to the lease language and the move-out photos, which together support his claim that the fee was taken without proof of the required condition. Reasons 14. The contract controls first. The lease permits the fee only if the apartment was not returned in reasonably clean condition. 15. The burden on that condition rested with Cedar Key. A landlord may not keep a cleaning fee merely by saying the photos are incomplete; it must point to reliable facts showing the condition that triggered the fee. 16. Here, Cedar Key’s evidence was too general. It repeatedly relied on the idea that the photos did not show every area, but it did not identify a specific dirty area with enough detail to prove the apartment was not reasonably clean. 17. Evan’s evidence was also not exhaustive, but it was enough to support his side once Cedar Key failed to prove the condition for the fee. The court does not require professional-level proof from a tenant when the lease only asks for reasonable cleanliness. 18. Because the fee was not justified on the present record, the $150 must be returned. The court does not award any larger amount because none was proven. Final order 19. Judgment is entered for Evan Mercer. 20. Cedar Key Rentals LLC shall pay Evan Mercer $150.00 in U.S. dollars. 21. The request for any further relief is denied because it was not proven on this record.