Cantwell v. J & R Properties Unlimited, Inc., 924 A.2d 355 (2007)

Citation: Cantwell v. J & R Properties Unlimited, Inc., 924 A.2d 355 (2007)
Parent Document: Cantwell v. J & R Properties Unlimited, Inc., 924 A.2d 355 (2007)
Jurisdiction: New Hampshire (state)
Effective Date: 2007-05-30
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1924522/cantwell-v-j-r-properties-unlim... ↗

Full Text

1,083 chars

Under the plain' meaning of the statute, the defendant was required to provide a signed receipt to the plaintiff that: (1) stated the amount of the security deposit; (2) specified wh¿ré the deposit would be held; and (3) notified the tenant that any conditions in the rental unit in need of repair or correction should be noted on the receipt or given to the landlord in writing within five days of occupancy. The defendant asserts that it substantially complied by endorsing the plaintiff’s security deposit check and providing him with a lease that contained a provision intended to comply with this statute. This provision acknowledged the amount of the security deposit, informed the tenant of the bank where the deposit would be held, and informed the tenant that if he or she failed to return the property condition report attached to the lease within seven days, the defendant would deem the property to be in perfect condition. Although the defendant concedes that it did not sign the lease, it argues that “[t]here was no evidence... that [it] refused to sign the contract.”

Other Sections in This Document (66)

Full Text