State bar on eviction does not apply mot ejectment actions-
4 Highpoint LLC v. Durelli
Defendants appealed an order granting possession a residential property in an ejectment action.
- Case Number: a0949-20_011222
Defendants appealed an order granting possession a residential property in an ejectment action. Defendants owned the house before a mortgage foreclosure in 2018. Mortgagee purchased the property and obtained a writ of possession in January 2019 but did not execute the writ and sold the property to plaintiff in September 2020. Plaintiff knew the property was occupied and that EO 106, a moratorium against removal of evicted tenants and foreclosed owners, was in effect. Plaintiff's efforts to come to an agreement with defendants failed and plaintiff instituted ejectment proceedings. Trial court found EO 106 was not meant to "protect trespassers and criminal activity," found that based on defendants' testimony, they were trying to stay in the property "to wear it out to uselessness" and held lockout was necessary in the interests of justice. Defendants' motion to stay the lockout was denied. They appealed arguing their removal was contrary to EO 106. Court noted the moratorium in EO 106 had expired and defendants' appeal was moot because there was no reason to restore their possession of the property. Additionally, trial court properly found that EO 106 did not apply to ejectment actions. EO 106 only barred removals of individuals in legal possession of the property and did not apply to squatters. source https://www.law.com/njlawjournal/almID/1642019742NJa0949200/
