## Facts

- Joy M. Cooper leased basement-level commercial office space in an office building in Hackensack, New Jersey, first part of the basement (1958) and then nearly the entire basement (1959) for use as commercial offices for meetings and sales training.
- A driveway along the north side of the building, not included in the leasehold, drained water toward the building; during rainstorms, water entered the leased basement area through or under the exterior/foundation wall.
- Flooding was recurrent from early in the tenancy and periodically interfered with office operations and scheduled meetings; building personnel sometimes mopped up but did not fix the cause.
- The landlord’s representative (and resident manager) knew of the condition, and during the 1959 lease negotiations assured Cooper the problem would be corrected, including resurfacing the driveway to drain away from the building.
- The driveway was resurfaced, but flooding became more frequent and deeper; after a management change, Cooper’s complaints allegedly received no meaningful response beyond post-storm cleanup.
- On December 20, 1961, a heavy rainfall caused serious flooding (several inches of water), interrupting a multi-state sales meeting; Cooper soon gave notice and vacated on December 30, 1961.
- A successor landlord later acquired the building and sued Cooper for unpaid rent through the lease term, claiming she unlawfully abandoned the premises.

## Issues

1. Whether the landlord’s failure to remedy recurring flooding caused by a defect in a landlord-controlled area outside the leased premises breached the implied covenant of quiet enjoyment and constituted constructive eviction.
2. Whether the tenant waived constructive eviction by remaining in possession for a period after the condition arose and after receiving assurances it would be repaired.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of New Jersey reversed the Appellate Division and reinstated the trial court’s judgment for the tenant.
- The court held that the landlord’s acts and omissions, after notice and assurances of repair, substantially interfered with the tenant’s beneficial enjoyment and rendered the premises substantially unsuitable for their leased purpose, amounting to constructive eviction.
- The court held the tenant did not waive the defense; her continued occupancy while relying on promised repairs and attempting to continue operations did not exceed a reasonable time under the circumstances.

## Legal Principles

- A covenant of quiet enjoyment is ordinarily implied in a lease even without express language.
- Constructive eviction occurs when a landlord’s act or omission, or conduct of someone acting under the landlord’s authority, renders premises substantially unsuitable for their leased purpose or seriously interferes with beneficial enjoyment, and the tenant abandons within a reasonable time.
- Landlord responsibility for quiet enjoyment may extend to conditions in common areas or exterior features under the landlord’s control when those conditions substantially interfere with the leased premises.
- Whether a tenant vacated within a reasonable time is fact-dependent; remaining temporarily while relying on promised repairs or while evaluating attempted fixes does not necessarily constitute waiver.

## Conclusion

Because the recurring flooding, originating from a landlord-controlled driveway and left uncorrected despite notice and assurances, substantially impaired the premises for their intended commercial office use, the tenant was constructively evicted and not liable for rent after vacating; her departure after a severe flooding incident was within a reasonable time and did not waive the defense.


Reste Realty Corp. v. Cooper, 53 N.J. 444, 251 A.2d 268 (1969)