Also known as: quietly enjoy · quietly enjoyed · quietly enjoying · covenant of quiet enjoyment
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
2 senses
An implied covenant in every lease that the landlord will not interfere with the tenant's possession and use of the premises. The covenant is breached by actual eviction, partial actual eviction, or constructive eviction arising from the landlord's conduct or from paramount title.
A future title covenant contained in a general warranty deed that assures the grantee against eviction or disturbance of possession by anyone holding superior title. The covenant runs with the land and supports a later claim by the grantee or a successor against the original grantor.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
An implied covenant in every lease that the landlord will not interfere with the tenant's possession and use of the premises. The covenant is breached by actual eviction, partial actual eviction, or constructive eviction arising from the landlord's conduct or from paramount title.
Quinlan Quezada leased an apartment above a building that the landlord also owned. The landlord leased the ground floor to a bar that played loud music late into the night. After repeated complaints, Quezada vacated and stopped paying rent. The court held that the persistent noise constituted a constructive eviction that breached the implied covenant of quiet enjoyment, relieving Quezada of further rent liability.
Quillan Quick leased commercial space in the basement of a building. After heavy rain the space flooded because the driveway had been improperly resurfaced. Quick complained, the landlord promised repairs, and Quick signed a new lease relying on that promise. When flooding continued, Quick vacated and sued. The persistent water intrusion breached the covenant of quiet enjoyment and supported a constructive-eviction defense.
Yes. When a holder of superior title actually evicts the tenant from all or part of the premises, the landlord has breached the covenant. The tenant may terminate the lease or, after a partial eviction, continue the lease for the remaining portion and obtain a proportionate rent abatement plus damages.
Any substantial interference with the tenant's possession or permissible use of the premises breaches the covenant. Actual eviction, partial actual eviction, and constructive eviction arising from the landlord's acts or from conditions the landlord controls all constitute breaches.
Yes. When the tenant elects to remain in possession after a breach, the tenant may recover damages, including the reasonable cost of substitute space made necessary by the landlord's interference, provided the lease remains in effect.
A future title covenant contained in a general warranty deed that assures the grantee against eviction or disturbance of possession by anyone holding superior title. The covenant runs with the land and supports a later claim by the grantee or a successor against the original grantor.
Quinton Quimby purchased industrial land from QuickFreight under a general warranty deed. Two years later a prior mortgagee foreclosed and evicted Quimby from the entire parcel. Quimby sued QuickFreight for breach of the quiet enjoyment covenant contained in the deed. Because the covenant runs with the land, Quimby recovered damages measured by the value of the land at the time of the original conveyance.
Quintina Qualls leased office space that included dedicated conference rooms. The landlord began demolition in the adjoining suite, creating constant noise that rendered the rooms unusable. Qualls remained in possession but rented substitute conference space elsewhere and sued for the added expense. The landlord's interference breached the covenant of quiet enjoyment, allowing recovery of the reasonable substitute costs while the lease continued.
Queen Quintero purchased a condominium unit subject to a recorded restriction prohibiting pets. She kept three indoor cats that created no noise or nuisance. When the association sought to enforce the rule, Quintero claimed the restriction violated her right to quiet enjoyment. The court upheld the restriction because it was reasonable and did not substantially impair the owner's use and enjoyment of the unit.
Quincy Quigley owned a home on a quiet residential street. Protesters repeatedly gathered directly in front of the house to express views on an unrelated political issue. Quigley sought an injunction limiting the protests to protect the home's quiet enjoyment. The court balanced free-speech interests against the targeted residential intrusion and upheld narrowly tailored time, place, and manner restrictions.
Yes. The covenant promises that the grantee will not be disturbed by superior title regardless of whether the encumbrance appears in the public records. Constructive notice does not defeat a claim for breach of the covenant.
Yes. UCC Article 9 imposes the same warranties of title, possession, and quiet enjoyment that accompany a voluntary disposition of the same type of property, unless the secured party expressly disclaims them in the manner permitted by the Code.
…therein. [^maj-37]: Ingalls v. Hobbs , 156 Mass. 348, 31 N.E. 286 (1892). [^maj-38]: The cases developing the doctrines of “quiet enjoyment” and “constructive eviction” are the most important. See 2 R. Powell, supra Note 10, ¶ 225 [3]. See also Gladden v. Walker & Dunlop , 83 U.S.App.D.C. 224, 168 F.2d 321 (1948) (landlord…
…only upon proof that plaintiff's cats would be likely to interfere with the right of other homeowners "to the peaceful and
…it is asserted in disregard of certain vital facts — the agent’s promise to remedy the condition and the existence of an express covenant of quiet enjoyment
…we transferred the appeals here. We affirm the judgments. The landlords argue that they did not violate the tenants’ implied covenant of quiet enjoyment