Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Cottle v. Butler
Citations: 608 A.2d 479; 257 N.J. Super. 401
Court: New Jersey Superior Court; May 5, 1992; New Jersey; State Appellate Court
Plaintiffs Christopher and Carolyn Cottle sought recovery of a security deposit balance and statutory penalties under N.J.S.A. 46:8-21.1 for the defendant landlord Allen G. Butler's failure to return the full deposit within 30 days after lease termination. The total amount held by Butler was $1,204.33, of which he returned $604.33 within the required period and later returned an additional $312.37, leaving $287.63 unrefunded, which was determined to be wrongfully withheld. The court addressed the interpretation of the statutory penalty, specifically whether it should be double the total security deposit or double the amount wrongfully withheld. Citing Henry v. Est. of Levy, the court noted that the penalty should be double the amount of the initial deposit plus interest, minus any payments made. However, referencing Jaremback v. Butler Ridge Apartments, the court emphasized that the penalty should apply only to the net amount due after deductions for charges owed to the landlord. The court concluded that the intent of the statute is to double the amount of money wrongfully withheld, not the initial deposit. Applying this interpretation, the judgment awarded to the plaintiffs was calculated as $575.26, which represents double the $287.63 wrongfully withheld, plus costs. The court highlighted that any other interpretation could lead to unjust results, reinforcing the need to adhere closely to legislative intent.