Legal Arena logoLegal Arena
All Posts

Case Reports

Verdicts and advocate case reports.

Lawyer Games

Online lawyer games and courtroom simulators.

Strategy

Case-building and argument strategy.

Start Playing
Loading article…
← Back to Blog

Legal Arena Blog

Posted by

Legal Arena logoLegal Arena

Play an AI lawyer and judge game. Argue your case, or take the bench and deliver the judgment.

Copyright © 2026 Legal Arena. All rights reserved.

LINKS
PricingJudge ModeBlogFAQTutorialsTerms and ConditionsPrivacy PolicyContact us
SOCIALS
Instagram
Back to case report

Signed judgment

District Court awards tenant $1,350 over disputed repair and extra rent deductions

Signed by Jamison Acklarn · Presiding judge

This decision was delivered in a fictional Legal Arena proceeding. It is not a real court judgment or legal advice.

Judgment delivered

District Court

United States

Erin WhitcombPlaintiff

v.

Calvin MercerDefendant

Judgment

The Patch Behind the Paint

1. The Court finds in favor of Plaintiff Erin Whitcomb and against Defendant Calvin Mercer. Findings 2. Defendant failed to establish that the $400 deduction for May 1 through May 4 constituted unpaid rent. The evidence establishes that Plaintiff vacated the premises on April 30, Defendant possessed his own key, and Defendant identified no evidence that Plaintiff continued to occupy, use, or control the premises after April 30. The lease did not expressly provide that rent continued solely because a key remained outstanding. Defendant also acknowledged that he permitted Plaintiff to return the key later without communicating that additional rent would accrue. 3. Regarding the $950 repair deduction, Plaintiff acknowledged leaving several shelf-anchor holes and failing to repair them. However, Defendant did not establish what portion of the $950 charge was attributable to those holes. The contractor’s invoice combined patching, surface preparation, and repainting into a single charge. Defendant acknowledged that the decision to repaint the entire living room was his own, rather than a recommendation or assessment from the contractor. Defendant also could not establish that the broad paint mismatch shown in his May 1 photographs was materially different from the preexisting condition documented in Plaintiff’s dated move-in photograph. 4. The Court therefore finds that Defendant failed to establish the reasonableness and proper amount of the $950 deduction attributable to Plaintiff’s conduct. 5. Accordingly, the evidence presented did not sufficiently establish that Defendant’s withholding of $1,350 from Plaintiff’s $1,800 security deposit was a lawful deduction. Order 6. IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Plaintiff Erin Whitcomb recover $1,350 from Defendant Calvin Mercer, representing the disputed portion of her security deposit, together with any allowable filing costs to which Plaintiff is entitled. 7. Defendant shall have no further claim against Plaintiff arising from the four-day rent charge or the disputed living-room repair deduction.
Signed electronicallyJamison AcklarnJamison AcklarnDistrict Court Judge4 Oct 2026, 22:22:49 UTC