Evicting an Employee After Termination of Employment
As most landlords in this state are aware, the very restrictive provisions of the Anti-Eviction Act do permit an eviction based upon the termination of employment by resident staff.
More specifically, the statute provides, at N.J.S.A. 2a:18-61.1, that you can secure judgment for possession where:
“(m) The landlord or owner conditioned the tenancy upon and in consideration for the tenant’s employment by the landlord or owner as superintendent, janitor, or in some other capacity, and such employment is being terminated.”
This permits the eviction of resident managers, maintenance staff, janitors, superintendents, or those hired “in some other capacity.”
The key language focused on in cases attempting to address eviction under this section appears to be “… conditioned the tenancy upon and in consideration for tenant’s employment…”.
Typically, providing the tenancy “in consideration for the employment” is thought to be addressed by allowing occupancy without requiring rent or with some rent discount. The courts have not limited their analysis to who pays when addressing this issue. Instead, decisions regarding the enforcement of these statutory rights by landlords have addressed whether the tenancy commenced “simultaneously” with the employment. If the tenancy predated the employment, the Courts have held that the pre-existing tenant had no reason to believe or understand that, upon termination of employment, the tenant’s pre-existing tenancy would also be adversely affected. Accordingly, the cases have indicated that the provision of housing must commence “simultaneously” with the tenant’s employment. Kearny Court Associates v. Spence, 262 N.J. Super. 241 (App. Div. 1993); Village Associates v. Perez, 253 N.J. Super. 507 (Law Div. 1991); and Cruz v. Reatique, 212 N.J. Super. 195 (Law Div. 1986).
In addition, these cases stand for the proposition that the landlord must prove that the premises in question are, in fact, devoted for use by employees and that there is a history of requiring residency in the premises on the part of the employee whose position has just been terminated. The successor employee must be assigned to that unit for occupancy.
Accordingly, the State Statute requires only one three-day notice to quit before the commencement of this action. Although it has not been stated in these cases, it is implied that eviction proceedings must commence promptly after termination to verify that the landlord “needs” the property for the successor employee.
No reported decisions have involved cases in which written employment contracts or any other contractual documentation linking the tenancy to employment existed. Obviously, it would be wise to establish, by written agreement, the fact that the tenancy is “conditioned. . .upon and in consideration for the tenant’s employment. . .”. This type of documentation could undermine the argument that a pre-existing tenant undertook employment with the expectation that the tenancy would continue after the employment was terminated. The existence of such an agreement would give the landlord a basis to avoid the rulings in the three cases described above, all of which involve tenancies that pre-existed employment. Landlords may be concerned about the possibility of having to “live with” a discharged employee as a tenant, whenever that may be the case. The Landlord-Employer should not hire existing tenants, even with an agreement, since the prevailing case law would not guarantee a post-employment eviction under those circumstances.
By Christopher J. Hanlon, Esq., a NJ Landlord Attorney
If you would like to schedule an appointment to discuss your landlord matter, please contact Christopher J. Hanlon, Esq. at chanlon@hnlawfirm.com or Fredrick P. Niemann, Esq. at fniemann@hnlawfirm.com. They can also be reached at (732) 863-9900.