Mountain View Park, LLC v. Gerald Robson, Jr., 168 N.H. 117 (2015)

Citation: Mountain View Park, LLC v. Gerald Robson, Jr., 168 N.H. 117 (2015)
Parent Document: Mountain View Park, LLC v. Gerald Robson, Jr., 168 N.H. 117 (2015)
Jurisdiction: New Hampshire (state)
Effective Date: 2015-08-11
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2826159/mountain-view-park-llc-v-gerald... ↗

Full Text

1,770 chars

By holding that the statute precludes the parties from agreeing that the
landlord may obtain possession without instituting a new proceeding if the
tenant defaults in the payment of ongoing rent during the period in which the
tenant has agreed to retire the arrearage, the majority eliminates one of the
major incentives for a landlord to enter into such an agreement. This means
that landlords will be less likely to do so, which in turn means that tenants will
be deprived of the opportunity for a second chance to remain in their homes.
Under the majority’s construction of the statute, the landlord is deprived of the
ability to obtain possession without the delay and expense of filing a new action
if the tenant, instead of “catching up” on his or her obligations, merely
reallocates payments from ongoing rent to payments on the arrearage.
Because it is fair to assume that most such agreements will call for arrearage
payments that are smaller than the amount of the ongoing rent, it is hard to
imagine why any landlord who has already obtained a judgment that permits
eviction would find such an arrangement at all attractive. Much more likely is
that a landlord who has already obtained a writ of possession and who
understands that, pursuant to the majority’s construction, a new eviction
proceeding will be required if the tenant is unable to pay both the scheduled
arrearage amount and ongoing rent, will conclude that entering into such
agreements is simply not worth it.3 Unfortunately, tenants — whom the
majority believes it is protecting — likely will bear the brunt of the adverse
effects of today’s decision. See AIMCO Props. V. Dziewisz, 152 N.H. 587, 591
(2005) (describing potential adverse consequences for tenants that may result
from eviction).

Other Sections in This Document (77)

Full Text