SDG v. Inventory Control Co.
178 N.J. Super. 411, 429 A.2d 394 (1981)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A month-to-month tenant's notice to quit that provides less than the required one month's notice is not void; rather, its effective date is deferred to the end of the month following the one in which the notice was given.
Facts:
- Inventory Control Company's five-year commercial lease with landlord S.D.G. expired on October 31, 1976.
- After the lease expired, Inventory Control Company's tenancy converted to a month-to-month basis.
- On November 16, 1976, Inventory Control Company provided written notice to S.D.G. of its intention to vacate the premises on November 30, 1976.
- Inventory Control Company vacated the premises by the end of the first week of December 1976.
- S.D.G. was unable to find a new tenant for the premises until April 1977.
Procedural Posture:
- S.D.G. sued Inventory Control Company in a trial court for unpaid rent for the months of December 1976 through March 1977.
- The trial judge entered a judgment in favor of the landlord, S.D.G., for all four months' rent.
- The tenant, Inventory Control Company, as appellant, appealed the judgment to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.
- The landlord, S.D.G., as respondent, cross-appealed regarding separate claims for property damage.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a month-to-month tenant's notice to quit, given during a rental month for the end of that same month, become effective to terminate the tenancy at the end of the following month?
Opinions:
Majority - Pressler, J.A.D.
Yes. A notice to quit that is given too late to terminate a month-to-month tenancy at the end of the current month is not void, but instead becomes effective at the end of the following month. The common-law rule requiring one month's notice is intended to afford the landlord a reasonable opportunity to secure a new tenant. To hold a late notice completely ineffective would unfairly penalize the tenant with indefinite liability for rent, which is beyond the landlord's legitimate expectations. Deferring the notice's effective date to the end of the next month fully satisfies the purpose of the rule, as it provides the landlord with one full month, plus the remainder of the month in which notice was given, to find a replacement tenant. Therefore, the tenant's notice on November 16 became effective on December 31, terminating its rent obligation as of that date.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies a previously unaddressed point of New Jersey common law regarding month-to-month tenancies. It rejects a harsh, punitive approach that would render a tenant's late notice void, thereby creating indefinite rent liability. Instead, the court adopted a practical and equitable rule that balances the landlord's interest in having adequate time to relet the premises with the tenant's interest in terminating the tenancy without facing an excessive penalty. This precedent provides certainty for both commercial landlords and tenants by establishing that a technically deficient notice to quit will be given effect at the earliest possible lawful date.
