## Facts

- A landlord leased commercial premises in Irvington, New Jersey, to Edward Pecht for a five-year term.
- The printed lease barred assignment, but a typewritten clause permitted assignment if the tenant obtained the landlord’s written consent.
- Pecht assigned the lease to Sam D. Moskowitz with the landlord’s written consent; the assignment stated that both assignor and assignee would remain liable for the balance of the term.
- Moskowitz later assigned the lease to Maria and Wilfred Christensen with the landlord’s written consent, but without Pecht’s consent; the Christensens agreed to comply with the lease.
- The Christensens defaulted and vacated the premises.
- The successor landlord sued Pecht and the assignees for unpaid rent, water charges, and damages for breach of a repair covenant.
- The trial court entered summary judgment for rent and water charges; the intermediate appellate court affirmed.

## Issues

1. Whether an original lessee who assigns a lease with the landlord’s consent, while remaining liable under the lease, is discharged when a later reassignment occurs with the landlord’s consent but without the original lessee’s consent.
2. Whether suretyship discharge principles apply to release the original lessee absent a material alteration of the lease obligations or prejudice to the original lessee.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of New Jersey affirmed.
- Pecht was not discharged from liability for rent and water charges by the subsequent assignment to the Christensens.
- The later assignment, made consistently with the lease’s consent-to-assign clause and the landlord’s consent, did not constitute a release or novation and did not materially change Pecht’s obligations.

## Legal Principles

- Assignment of a lease does not relieve the original lessee of contractual covenants (including payment obligations) absent an express release or conduct amounting to a novation.
- A landlord may release an original lessee expressly or by entering a new tenancy arrangement with an assignee that effectively terminates the prior contractual relationship.
- A lease provision permitting assignment with the landlord’s written consent generally carries with the lease to assignees, allowing reassignment with the landlord’s consent unless restricted.
- Even if the original lessee is treated as a surety as between the lessee and assignee, discharge requires a material alteration of the principal obligation or prejudice to the surety; a subsequent assignment on the same lease terms is insufficient.

## Conclusion

The court held that the original lessee remained contractually liable for rent-related obligations despite a later reassignment approved by the landlord, because there was no release or novation and no material change to the lease obligations that would justify discharge under suretyship principles.


Gerber v. Pecht, 15 N.J. 29, 104 A.2d 41 (N.J. 1954)