## Facts

- The Housing Authority of the City of Bayonne was the landlord of Deborah Mims and her daughter, Sincerrae Ross, longtime public-housing tenants under a written lease.
- From about 1999 to 2005, the tenants repeatedly complained to the Authority and other public bodies about apartment conditions and maintenance/services.
- In 2005, the Authority served multiple notices to cease (April 28, July 19, and August 12) and then a notice to quit and demand for possession (September 29), terminating the tenancy effective November 1, 2005.
- The Authority filed an eviction complaint on December 22, 2005, asserting lease/rules violations: (1) denial of exterminator access, (2) an unauthorized occupant, and (3) pet-policy violations.
- After a five-day bench trial, the court found the Authority proved two of the three alleged grounds for eviction.
- The trial court also found the eviction action was filed in retaliation for the tenants’ complaints, violating the New Jersey Tenant Reprisal Act (TRA), but held the TRA was preempted by federal public-housing law and entered judgment for possession.
- The tenants appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether federal public-housing statutes and regulations preempt the New Jersey Tenant Reprisal Act when a public-housing authority seeks eviction.
2. Whether, absent preemption, a trial court’s finding of retaliatory motive under the TRA requires dismissal of the eviction complaint even if lease violations are otherwise proven.

## Decision

- The Appellate Division reversed the judgment for possession.
- The court held the TRA is not preempted in the public-housing context.
- Because the trial court found the eviction was retaliatory and violated the TRA, the tenants were entitled to dismissal of the eviction complaint.
- The court directed entry of judgment for defendants dismissing the eviction action.

## Legal Principles

- Federal public-housing law does not expressly preempt state-law anti-retaliation protections and does not occupy the entire field of landlord-tenant eviction regulation.
- Where federal law incorporates reliance on state eviction procedures and permits additional state protections, state statutes such as the TRA may apply to public-housing evictions.
- The TRA bars an eviction action brought in retaliation for tenants’ protected complaints; when retaliation is found, the ordinary consequence is that the eviction cannot proceed.
- A public-housing authority must satisfy federal termination requirements and also comply with applicable state-law defenses and protections, including retaliatory-eviction prohibitions.

## Conclusion

The Appellate Division held that New Jersey’s Tenant Reprisal Act applies to public-housing tenancies and is not preempted by federal law; because the eviction complaint was found retaliatory under the TRA, the eviction was barred and the complaint had to be dismissed.


Hous. Auth. of Bayonne v. Mims, 396 N.J. Super. 195, 933 A.2d 613 (App. Div. 2007)