§ 70-25-201

8
322 P.2d           1104,         1109.         Accordingly,            we must           accept        the     District
Court's          holding         on this       issue.
         Based on that              holding,          the District             Court        should     have allowed
the landlord              to prorate           the April          rent       and charge           the tenants             for
the period          of time         for       which     the property             was not re-leased.                    That
period         of time       was from April              1 through            April         8 and was reflected
by the $126.67              that     the landlord           withheld            from the security               deposit
for unpaid          rent.         Thus, the landlord                properly           withheld        $126.67         from
tenants'          security         deposit        and the District                   Court     erred      in awarding
that     amount to the tenants.
         The landlord               was authorized               to withhold                a total       of    $134.67
from the security                  deposit       ($8 nail        hole and $126.67 prorated                        rent).
The landlord              wrongfully            withheld         the       $70.50       for     cleaning        and the
$10      for      the       smoke         detector         for         a     total       of      $80.50.              Under
§ 70-25-204,              MCA, the tenants                 were entitled                to double         the     amount
wrongfully          withheld            for    the total         of $161 in damages.                   We therefore
hold      that      the      District          Court       erred       in     part       in     finding        that     the
landlord          wrongfully             withheld        a portion             of     the      tenants'        security
deposit.
                                                        Issue      2
         Did the District                 Court err        in determining                there       was an illegal
provision          in the rental               agreement          and awarding                damages?
         The lease           contained          a provision            which         stated:         "Acceptance           of
a refund           of      all     or     a portion          of        the     deposit          by     tenant         shall
constitute          a full         and final          release       of landlord                from any claims             of