Knight purchased an apartment building that was occupied by tenants Hallsthammer, Decaprio, and Breit. The day after acquiring the building, Knight informed the tenants that their rent was being increased. A week later, Breit, on behalf of himself and other tenants, informed Knight that the tenants intended to withhold their rent because of the state of disrepair of the building. In their complaint, the tenants cited wall cracks, peeling paint, water leaks, heating and electrical fi xture problems, broken or inoperable windows, rodents and cockroaches, and lack of suffi cient heat. The tenants accused Knight of a breach of his warranty of habitability, and for this reason they withheld rent payments. Knight defended his actions, stating that the tenants had not given him time to remedy the problems.

Does it seem likely that the court would support the actions of the tenants? [ Knight v. Hallsthammer, 623 P.2d 268 (California).]