§ 540

Citation: § 540
Parent Document: Flo-Pro v. 10 Iron Horse Drive, et al, 2011 DNH 155 (2011)
Jurisdiction: New Hampshire (state)
Effective Date: 2011-09-28
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10694944/flo-pro-v-10-iron-horse-drive-et-al/ ↗

Full Text

1,262 chars

9At oral argument, Flo-Pro acknowledged that it was not
aware of any authority that a landlord's obligation vis-a-vis the
tenant's security deposit "runs with the land," so that an
incoming landlord has no right to demand a security deposit from
an existing tenant who tendered it to the outgoing landlord.
This court's research uncovered one Massachusetts case ruling
that "a commercial tenant who paid a security deposit to its
original lessor is entitled to a credit for the security deposit
from a successor landlord." Sacco v. DeBon-Aire, Inc., 6 Mass.
L. Rptr. 265 (Mass. Super. C t . Nov. 1, 1996). As Sacco observed,
though, "decisions in other states are divided on this issue,"
with some holding that a tenant has no claim against a successor
landlord for a security deposit given its predecessor.        See,
e.g., Mullendore Theatres, Inc. v. Growth Realty Investors Co.,
691 P.2d 970, 972 & n.2 (Wash. C t . Ap p . 1984) (citing cases).
     And even assuming that the New Hampshire Supreme Court would
follow Sacco, it would seem to apply only if (as was the case
there) the tenant did not stipulate otherwise.      C f . 3 James
Charles Smith, Friedman on Contracts and Conveyances of Real
Property § 12.4 (7th ed. 1991) (observing that, even in a

Other Sections in This Document (490)

Full Text