175 Executive House, LLC v. Elesha Miles
156 A.3d 190
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | 2017Background
- Defendant (Miles) rented an East Orange apartment and received a State Rental Assistance Program (S-RAP) voucher; as an elderly/disabled participant she paid 25% of adjusted income as her rent share and DCA paid the balance.
- Landlord filed a summary dispossess complaint for nonpayment of rent alleging $1,545 due (complaint omitted reference to S-RAP); default judgment entered after Miles missed court due to illness.
- Judgment of possession was entered based solely on unpaid "additional rent" charges (attorney's fees, late fees, court costs) from an earlier matter; landlord later claimed $1,400–$1,806 in additional rent due.
- Miles filed Orders to Show Cause asserting she was current on her tenant share and that eviction solely for additional rent was improper for a rent-subsidized tenant; trial court confirmed the judgment and lockout occurred November 18, 2015.
- Trial court later vacated the judgment while appeal was pending, then partially vacated that vacatur for lack of jurisdiction; on appeal the Appellate Division reversed the judgment of possession.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a tenant receiving S-RAP assistance can be evicted solely for nonpayment of "additional rent" (late fees, attorney's fees, costs) when the tenant's subsidized share is paid | Landlord: S-RAP is only "comparable" to Section 8; regulations permitting rent above payment standard mean additional charges can be enforced as rent | Miles: S-RAP is modeled on Section 8; federal preemption principles and analogous case law prohibit expanding "rent" to include additional charges for eviction purposes | Held: S-RAP tenants cannot be evicted solely for nonpayment of additional rent charges; such charges cannot be used to expand the definition of rent and justify summary dispossess against a subsidized tenant |
| Whether landlord met burden to prove entitlement to attorney's fees and validity of additional rent charges | Landlord: claimed additional rent and attorney's fees justified eviction | Miles: contested the amount and entitlement; argued eviction improper because tenant share was paid | Held: Appellate decision did not decide the substantive validity or amount of additional rent or attorney's fees; judgment of possession reversed on statutory/regulatory ground regarding S-RAP protection |
Key Cases Cited
- Hodges v. Sasil Corp., 189 N.J. 210 (discusses remedy for nonpayment and limits on "additional rent")
- Community Realty Management v. Harris, 155 N.J. 212 (lease terms cannot convert tangential fees to rent unless permitted)
- Housing Authority & Urban Redevelopment Agency v. Taylor, 171 N.J. 580 (federal rent-limiting scheme preempts broader state lease provisions in subsidized housing)
- Sudersan v. Royal, 386 N.J. Super. 246 (applied Taylor to Section 8 vouchers; landlord cannot broaden rent definition to include utility/additional charges to justify eviction)