In 1995, the Commonwealth enacted legislation known as the Expedited Eviction of Drug Traffickers Act (the “Act”), 35 P.S. §§780-151, et seq. The Act establishes a civil cause of action to evict or remove tenants, or other persons, from leased residential premises for drug-related criminal activity . When the Act refers to “civil action” or “court”, it denotes the Court of Common Pleas for the county in which the leased premises is located, as opposed to the local Magistrate District Court. In effect, this legislation essentially permits a landlord to bypass the technical requirements of the Landlord Tenant Act for an expedited process in such instances, though you still could proceed with eviction under the regular methods, as deemed appropriate.

Commencement of an action in the Court of Common Pleas differs greatly than typical procedures at the local Magistrate District Court level. For instance, at the county level, the matter is commenced by filing a verified, fact-specific Complaint with the Prothonotary in accordance with the local Rules of Court, as opposed to a form-driven Landlord & Tenant Complaint. In most instances, the Sheriff makes service of the Complaint personally on the Defendant, who then has twenty (20) days within which to file a response. However, due to the expedited nature of this particular action, an alternative method of service would have to be employed. Once a hearing is scheduled, a Common Pleas Judge will preside over the proceeding, at which time evidence and testimony of the parties, including witnesses, if any, will be expected. As you may know, hearings at the Common Pleas level also differ greatly, as the Judge presides over the case with strict compliance of the rules of evidence, procedure, and the like. Thus, due to its procedure-driven nature, it is strongly recommended that an attorney be involved from the beginning stages of drafting the Complaint, to commencement of the action, and through to its completion.

Generally, the Act permits a landlord to seek a “complete eviction” (removal of a tenant and all members of a tenant’s household) based on this cause of action if the tenant is found to have triggered any one of the “grounds for eviction”, which are set forth in §780-156(a)(1-5). The grounds for eviction in this section appear broad, as it includes not only the tenant’s conduct, action or inaction concerning drug-related criminal activity, but also extends to members of the tenant’s household and/or the tenant’s guests. Notably, the fact that a criminal prosecution involving the drug-related criminal activity is not commenced, or if commenced, has not yet been concluded or has terminated without a conviction, does not preclude a civil action or order for eviction under the Act (See §780-167(a)). Once the action is initiated, the tenant is allowed certain limited affirmative defenses to eviction, essentially founded on lack of knowledge; however, a tenant is precluded from using as a defense the mere assertion that the incident was an isolated occurrence or that the person who engaged in drug-related criminal activity no longer resides in the tenant’s rental unit. (See §§ 780-157, 780-163). The court is also permitted to order a partial eviction for any individuals other than the tenant, including a tenant’s minor or adult member of tenant’s household, if the court finds that the person has engaged in drug-related criminal activity on or in the immediate vicinity of the leased premises (§780-156(b)). Once filed, the court is required to set a hearing on an expedited basis and within fifteen (15) days following the filing of the complaint (See § 780-164). As with regular execution proceedings, the physical eviction is carried out by the appropriate law enforcement officer, presumably the Sheriff’s Office.

Significantly, it is not necessary to provide notice to the tenant to vacate the premises prior to filing the complaint initiating a civil action under the Act (See § 780-165). In this respect alone, this legislation vastly differs from the prophylactic notice requirements of Act 261. Moreover, a landlord is able to collect rent due and owing from the tenant during the pendency of the action (See §780-170).

Note that a quirk in the Act permits a tenant organization (an organization or association of residents of the community, whether incorporated or not) to institute its own cause of action under the Act, and if successful, it may recover any attorneys fees and costs from the landlord if the landlord had refused to initiate an action within ten (10) days after having been requested to do so in writing. A landlord can also be responsible for reasonable costs of a prevailing plaintiff if a court determines that that the landlord failed to prosecute an initiated action with reasonable diligence. In this regard, it is important to take appropriate action should the need to do so arise. Lastly, note that civil immunity is imposed for any good faith action brought under this Act, which includes any person who initiates the action or any person who provides information to an individual to assist in instituting the action (See §780-174).