STRATEGIC MUNICIPAL INVESTMENTS, LLC v. EDWARD H. SMITH

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-4502-08T14502-08T1

STRATEGIC MUNICIPAL

INVESTMENTS, LLC,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

EDWARD H. SMITH and

LANA M. SMITH,

Defendants-Appellants.

_________________________________

 

Submitted: June 9, 2010 - Decided:

Before Judges Axelrad and Sapp-Peterson.

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Ocean County, Docket No. LT-4563-08.

Edward and Lana Smith, appellants pro se.

Zeitz & Stein, LLC, attorneys for respondent (Gary C. Zeitz, on the brief).

PER CURIAM

This matter arises out of a residential lease agreement between plaintiff, Strategic Municipal Investments, LLC, the landlord, and defendants, Edward and Lana Smith, the tenants. It appears plaintiff acquired ownership of the property located at 1 Teal Place in Bayville, previously owned by defendants, pursuant to a municipal property tax sale and subsequent foreclosure action. Plaintiff then entered into a lease with defendants beginning on July 1, 2008, at $1,500 per month. On November 24, 2008, plaintiff filed the within lawsuit to evict defendants from the property for nonpayment of rent, which was scheduled for trial on December 22, 2008. Pursuant to mediation provided under the auspices of the court on that date, the parties entered into a "Consent to Enter Judgment and Stipulation of Settlement" (settlement agreement) that allowed defendants to have additional time to cure the rent arrears but provided upon default, plaintiff could seek a warrant of removal.

On April 2, 2009, the court issued an order granting plaintiff's motion for entry of a warrant of removal, which warrant was issued and served upon defendants. Pursuant to defendant's motion, on April 28, 2009, the court entered an order staying execution of the warrant until May 7, 2009. Defendants appealed and, with plaintiff's consent, on May 15, 2009, we granted an emergent stay until June 6, 2009, allowing defendants additional time if they paid the arrearage, which they did not. On June 18, 2009, appellants were evicted. On June 30, 2009, the lease expired.

On appeal, defendants appear to be belatedly challenging plaintiff's purchase of the property, which is not appropriately before us. To the extent defendants are challenging the trial court's authority to allow the eviction to proceed, we are satisfied plaintiff properly established grounds for evicting defendants for non-payment of rent pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2A:18-61.1(a). It is undisputed defendants did not make the $9,034 payment to cure their rent arrearage, nor did they pay any rent for the months of January and February 2009, as required by the settlement agreement. Defendants also failed to pay the remaining rent, late charges and other contractual fees due under the lease. As defendants were properly evicted from the premises and the lease has expired, their appeal is moot.

 
Appeal dismissed.

(continued)

(continued)

3

A-4502-08T1

June 22, 2010