## Facts

- Echo Consulting Services, Inc. leased the downstairs floor of an office building under a written lease granting a “common right of access” and “common use of the parking lot.”
- North Conway Bank later purchased the building, assumed the lease, and became Echo’s landlord.
- The bank renovated the street-level floor to create a bank branch, generating noise, dirt, and occasional electrical interruptions.
- During construction, the rear parking lot became inaccessible; Echo employees used the front lot and the street-level entrance to reach Echo’s downstairs space.
- The bank changed locks on the street-level access door for security, preventing Echo’s employees from using that door after regular business hours.
- After the lock change, Echo’s after-hours access was through a rear door, which Echo claimed was sometimes obstructed and difficult to use.
- Echo sued for constructive eviction, partial actual eviction, breach of the implied covenant of quiet enjoyment, and breach of the lease; the trial court ruled for the bank after a bench trial.

## Issues

1. Whether constructive eviction requires proof that the landlord intended to evict the tenant, and whether the bank’s conduct substantially deprived Echo of use or enjoyment.
2. Whether restricting use of a particular entrance (and related construction impacts) constituted a partial actual eviction.
3. Whether the implied covenant of quiet enjoyment protects only against dispossession/superior title claims or also against substantial interferences with beneficial use and enjoyment.
4. Whether the trial court applied the correct legal standards to Echo’s claims.

## Decision

- Affirmed the denial of constructive eviction, holding intent to evict is not required but the proved interferences were not sufficiently substantial to constitute constructive eviction.
- Affirmed the denial of partial actual eviction, holding Echo was not physically deprived of any part of its leased premises and retained at least one means of access at all relevant times.
- Reversed on the implied covenant of quiet enjoyment and remanded, holding the trial court used an overly narrow standard and must evaluate whether the bank’s conduct substantially interfered with Echo’s use or enjoyment.

## Legal Principles

- Constructive eviction occurs when a landlord, by act or omission, deprives the tenant of the use or enjoyment of leased property without a physical exclusion; landlord intent to evict is not an element.
- Partial actual eviction requires a physical withholding of possession of some portion of the leased premises; inconvenience or restriction of a particular entrance, without loss of possession, is insufficient where access remains.
- A lease granting “common right of access” and “common use” does not necessarily guarantee any specific entrance or access pattern absent express terms.
- The implied covenant of quiet enjoyment protects against substantial interferences with the tenant’s beneficial use or enjoyment, not only against dispossession or superior title claims.
- Interferences may support damages for breach of quiet enjoyment even if they do not rise to constructive eviction.

## Conclusion

The court held that the bank’s renovations and access changes did not amount to constructive eviction or partial actual eviction, but it expanded and clarified that quiet enjoyment protects tenants from substantial interferences with use and enjoyment and remanded for reconsideration of that claim under the correct standard.


Echo Consulting Servs., Inc. v. N. Conway Bank, 140 N.H. 566, 669 A.2d 227 (1995)