Mr. Katz owned an apartment in Eretz Yisrael, which he used mostly during the summer. He would rent it out occasionally during the rest of the year, if someone asked for it.
A friend of the Katzes, Mr. Bloom, was planning to spend the winter in Eretz Yisrael. “We’d like to rent your apartment for the winter,” said Mr. Bloom. “We’ll be there through Pesach; it’s hard to find a rental for that time period.”
“For a friend like you,” replied Mr. Katz, “I’m willing to rent!” They drafted a rental agreement through Pesach.
During winter break, the Katzes decided to visit Israel for a simchah. They asked Mr. Bloom whether it would be possible to stay in one of the rooms for the week, but Mr. Bloom refused. The incident left a bad taste with Mr. Katz.
When the air conditioner/heater in the apartment broke a week later and needed extensive repairs, Mr. Katz and Mr. Bloom got into a volatile argument over who was liable.
The relationship deteriorated further a month later when the apartment was broken into. The two men were no longer able to talk without fighting.
Mr. Katz sought to evict Mr. Bloom from the apartment. “I only agreed to rent to him on account of the friendship,” he reasoned. “I stated from the beginning, ‘For a friend like you, I’m willing to rent!’ If he’s no longer a friend, the agreement is no longer binding!”
Mr. Katz decided to consult Rabbi Dayan.
“Rema (C.M.312:9) writes that one who rented his house to a friend who became a foe cannot evict him,” said Rabbi Dayan. “However, if the landlord said from the beginning that he is renting only because he is his friend, he can evict him.”
“It sounds like I can evict Mr. Bloom then,” said Mr. Katz.
“The commentaries significantly limit the Rema’s ruling, though, based on its source,” replied Rabbi Dayan. “The Gemara (B.M. 101b) relates that a man sought storage space for barrels of wine. A certain woman initially refused to rent him space, so he betrothed her, after which she provided him storage space. After housing the wine, the man promptly divorced her. The woman had porters move the barrels out to the street.
“Rav Huna ben Rav Yehoshua upheld her action, commenting that the man deserved it. Furthermore, even if the space was for rent, the woman may say that she is willing to rent to anyone but him, since he is like a lion waiting in ambush” (C.M. 319:1).
“That’s a wild story!” commented Mr. Katz. “What implication does it have for us?”
“Ritva (ibid.) and the Nimukei Yosef (59a) explain that the woman can claim this only when she refused to rent at first,” answered Rabbi Dayan. “Then, it is evident — as if she stipulated — that she provided storage only because of their relationship. Otherwise, she could not. They add, rhetorically: A person who rented a house to a friend for a set time, and afterward there was a fight between them — can he evict him? Certainly not!
“The Ketzos (312:3; 319:1) cites Maharik (#181) that even if the contract stated l’ahavas hashalom (for the love of peace), the landlord cannot cancel the lease if there wasn’t an explicit stipulation,” continued Rabbi Dayan. “Only in the Gemara’s case, where the woman refused at first and agreed only on account of the betrothal, is there absolutely clear indication, which suffices. Nesivos (312:7) similarly limits the ruling to a case where the house was not for rent, and the landlord indicated at the time of rental that he was willing to rent only on account of the friendship (see C.M. 207:3).
“Additionally, Taz (312:9) qualifies that the renter can be evicted only if he was responsible for the animosity, as in the Gemara’s case,” concluded Rabbi Dayan. “Thus, you do not have sufficient basis to evict Mr. Bloom.”