NJ Supremes End Three-Decades Long Eviction Battle, Granting Hoboken Homeowner The Green Light To Give Long-Time Tenant The Heave-Ho, Allowing Landlord To Move Into Her Own House

In Hoboken, New Jersey, POLITICKER NJ reports:

• It took a Hoboken woman three decades to evict the tenants in her converted garage apartment so that she could move in. In the end, it came down to how the state’s highest court interpreted a statute intended to prevent tenants from being arbitrarily or unreasonably evicted from their homes.
  
  The New Jersey Anti-Eviction Act
  
  Under the Anti-Eviction Act, the owner of a building that contains three residential units or less can legally oust a tenant if the owner intends to live in the unit.
  
  ***
  The case, Cashin v. Bello, essentially revolved around the Legislature’s use of the word “building,” which is not defined in the statute. The specific question before the Court was whether “building” denotes a single, unattached physical structure or whether “building” includes all structures owned by an individual that are located on the same parcel of land.
  
  The Landlord-Tenant Dispute
  
  Plaintiff Anna Mae Cashin owns a 2,435 square-foot parcel of land in Hoboken, which contains two separate structures: a six-unit apartment building and a two-story single-family home built in a converted garage. Cashin and her late husband began renting it out in 1971. In 1973, defendant Marisela Bello moved into that unit and continues to live there with her son. The rent is $345 per month, only five dollars more than the rent she initially paid in 1973.
  
  Cashin unsuccessfully sought to regain legal possession of the leased property several times. On January 4, 2012, she sent Bello a notice to quit under N.J.S.A. 2A:18-61.1(l)(3), asserting that the unit was a single-family home and that she, the owner, wished to reside there. Bello refused to leave, and Cashin filed suit.
  
  The trial court dismissed the complaint, and the Appellate Division affirmed, concluding that N.J.S.A. 2A:18- 61.1(l)(3) was not applicable to the separate garage apartment because “building” should be interpreted to mean “premises.” According to the appeals court, it was an additional residential unit of the larger apartment building.
  
  The NJ Supreme Court’s Ruling
  
  The Supreme Court of New Jersey reversed, concluding that Cashin was within her rights as a landowner to evict the tenant. “By the plain language of [the act], we hold that the converted garage constitutes its own ‘building’ for purposes of the act, and that plaintiff may therefore evict defendant,” Justice Faustino Fernandez-Vina wrote on behalf of the unanimous court. [...]

For more, see NJ Supreme Court Ends Epic Hoboken Landlord-Tenant Battle.

For the ruling of the New Jersey Supreme Court, see Cashin v. Bello, ___ N.J. ___ (October 7, 2015).