## Facts

- Alexander and Ernest Gottdiener, partners trading as Oakwood Village Associates, owned and operated Oakwood Village, a 516-unit apartment complex.
- Paul and Janet Mailhot became tenants in December 1975 and renewed their tenancy through January 31, 1980.
- The Mailhots reported no significant problems until fall 1978, when new tenants moved into the apartment directly below them.
- In December 1978 and January 1979, the Mailhots complained to management about “intolerable noise” from the downstairs unit, including slamming doors, yelling and screaming children, and loud television/radio late at night.
- Alexander Gottdiener expressed sympathy and attempted to resolve the dispute, but the efforts did not end the disturbances.
- According to Mr. Mailhot, the downstairs neighbors then engaged in harassment and retaliation after the Mailhots complained.
- In late January 1979, Mr. Mailhot reported suspected malicious damage to his vehicle kept in a garage accessible only to the Mailhots, the landlords, and the downstairs neighbors, and again asked the landlords to take action.
- The problems continued despite further attempts to address them.
- In June 1979, after repeated unsuccessful efforts to stop the conduct, the Mailhots purchased a home and notified the landlords that they would terminate the tenancy at the end of August 1979, asserting the landlords’ failure to stop harassment and intimidation breached the lease.
- The Mailhots vacated at the end of August 1979.
- After the move-out, the landlords told the Mailhots they had forfeited their security deposit and sued for unpaid rent for September, October, and November 1979 (plus late charges and claimed repair/restoration costs).
- The Mailhots denied rent liability, asserted constructive eviction based on breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment, and counterclaimed for double the security deposit under N.J.S.A. 46:8-21.1.
- After a bench trial, the trial court found a substantial interference with the Mailhots’ quiet enjoyment, held they were constructively evicted, denied the landlords’ rent claim, and granted statutory relief on the security-deposit counterclaim. The landlords appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether tenants may prove constructive eviction where neighboring tenants cause excessive noise and harassment and, after notice, the landlord fails to take sufficient reasonable measures to protect the tenants’ quiet enjoyment.
2. Whether the landlords’ retention/handling of the security deposit violated N.J.S.A. 46:8-21.1, entitling the tenants to double damages.

## Decision

- The Appellate Division affirmed.
- The court upheld the trial court’s finding that the neighbors’ conduct substantially interfered with the Mailhots’ quiet enjoyment and supported constructive eviction.
- Because the Mailhots were constructively evicted and vacated, the landlords could not recover rent for September through November 1979 (or related late charges tied to that rent).
- The court also affirmed the award of double the security deposit under N.J.S.A. 46:8-21.1 based on the landlords’ improper withholding of the deposit.

## Legal Principles

- The covenant of quiet enjoyment protects a tenant’s right to use and enjoy leased premises without substantial interference.
- In a multi-unit building, substantial, recurring interference caused by other tenants may support constructive eviction when the landlord, after receiving notice, fails to take reasonable steps within the landlord’s control to stop or abate the disturbance.
- Constructive eviction requires a substantial interference and that the tenant vacate the premises within a reasonable time after it becomes apparent the interference will not be remedied.
- Under N.J.S.A. 46:8-21.1, a landlord who wrongfully withholds a security deposit or fails to comply with statutory return/accounting requirements is liable for double the amount wrongfully withheld (subject to the statute’s terms).

## Conclusion

Gottdiener v. Mailhot held that tenants may treat themselves as constructively evicted when ongoing, serious noise and harassment by neighboring tenants substantially interferes with quiet enjoyment and the landlord, after notice, does not take sufficient reasonable measures to end it; the tenants’ move-out relieved them of later rent liability and supported an award of double the security deposit under N.J.S.A. 46:8-21.1.


Gottdiener v. Mailhot, 431 A.2d 851, 179 N.J. Super. 286 (1981)