Cosigners and guarantors both assume responsibility for a tenant's lease obligations, but the legal relationship is different. Cosigners are co-tenants on the lease; guarantors are not on the lease but are liable if the tenant defaults.
§ I — What "cosigner" and "guarantor" mean
A cosigner signs the lease itself and becomes a co-tenant — equally responsible for rent and capable of being sued for non-payment alongside the primary tenant. A guarantor signs a separate guaranty agreement and is only liable when the primary tenant defaults; the landlord must usually exhaust remedies against the tenant first. The choice between the two affects credit reporting, eviction procedures, and the order in which the landlord can recover unpaid rent.
§ II — How cosigner vs guarantor varies by state
-
Massachusetts
Massachusetts has no statute specifically governing residential lease cosigners or guarantors — general contract law and the Statute of Frauds (M.G.L. c. 259, § 1) apply. A guaranty must be in writing and signed by the guarantor; the lease typically attaches a separate guaranty addendum where the guarantor signs.
-
Florida
Florida treats a lease guaranty as an ordinary suretyship subject to the Statute of Frauds (Fla. Stat. § 725.01). The guaranty must be in writing and signed by the guarantor; Florida courts construe guaranties strictly and limit a guarantor's liability to the express terms of the guaranty (Brann v. Flagship Bank of Tampa, 450 So. 2d 237).
-
California
California treats lease guaranties as ordinary contracts of suretyship under Cal. Civ. Code § 2787 et seq. The guaranty must be in writing and signed by the guarantor (Cal. Civ. Code § 1624 — Statute of Frauds). California courts read guaranties strictly against the landlord (Bloom v. Bender, 48 Cal. 2d 793).
-
New York
New York imposes specific written-disclosure requirements on lease guaranties; the guarantor's obligation must be in writing and signed (Statute of Frauds, GOL § 5-701).
-
Texas
Texas treats a lease guaranty as a suretyship contract subject to the Statute of Frauds (Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 26.01). The guaranty must be in writing, signed by the guarantor, and Texas courts construe ambiguities against the landlord (strictissimi juris doctrine — Reece v. First State Bank, 566 S.W.2d 296).
-
North Carolina
North Carolina treats a lease guaranty as a suretyship contract under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 22-1 (Statute of Frauds). The guaranty must be in writing and signed by the guarantor; North Carolina courts read guaranties strictly and require clear language to extend liability to renewal periods.
-
Georgia
Georgia requires a guaranty to be in writing and signed by the guarantor (O.C.G.A. § 13-5-30 — Statute of Frauds). Georgia courts apply the rule of strictissimi juris to suretyship contracts: any material change to the underlying obligation without the guarantor's consent discharges the guarantor.
-
Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania treats a lease guaranty as a suretyship under 33 P.S. § 3 (Statute of Frauds): the guaranty must be in writing and signed by the guarantor. The Pennsylvania Uniform Written Obligations Act (33 P.S. § 6) further requires consideration unless the writing recites that the parties intend to be legally bound.
-
Illinois
Illinois treats a lease guaranty as a suretyship contract subject to the Statute of Frauds (740 ILCS 80/1). The guaranty must be in writing and signed by the guarantor. Illinois courts construe guaranties narrowly and limit a guarantor's liability to the original lease term unless the guaranty expressly extends to renewals.
-
Ohio
Ohio treats a lease guaranty as a suretyship subject to the Statute of Frauds (Ohio Rev. Code § 1335.05): the guaranty must be in writing and signed by the guarantor. Ohio courts construe guaranties strictly in favor of the guarantor and require clear language to bind the guarantor to renewal terms.
-
Michigan
Michigan treats a lease guaranty as a suretyship contract under MCL 566.132 (Statute of Frauds): the guaranty must be in writing and signed by the guarantor. Michigan courts construe guaranties strictly and require unambiguous language to extend liability beyond the original lease term.
-
Washington
Washington treats a lease guaranty as a suretyship under RCW 19.36.010 (Statute of Frauds): the guaranty must be in writing and signed by the guarantor. Washington courts construe guaranties strictly and limit a guarantor's liability to the express terms of the guaranty.
-
Arizona
Arizona treats a lease guaranty as a suretyship contract under A.R.S. § 44-101 (Statute of Frauds): the guaranty must be in writing and signed by the guarantor. Arizona courts construe guaranties strictly in favor of the guarantor.
-
Virginia
Virginia treats a lease guaranty as a suretyship subject to the Statute of Frauds (Va. Code § 11-2). The guaranty must be in writing and signed by the guarantor; Virginia courts construe ambiguities in suretyship agreements against the party that drafted them.
-
New Jersey
New Jersey treats a lease guaranty as a suretyship subject to the Statute of Frauds (N.J.S.A. 25:1-15): the guaranty must be in writing and signed by the guarantor. The Anti-Eviction Act (N.J.S.A. 2A:18-61.1) substantially limits a landlord's ability to recover against a guarantor for nonrenewal — recovery generally requires "good cause" under the Act.
-
Colorado
Colorado treats a lease guaranty as a suretyship subject to the Statute of Frauds (C.R.S. § 38-10-112): the guaranty must be in writing and signed by the guarantor. Colorado courts construe guaranties strictly in favor of the guarantor (Greene v. Springs, 51 Colo. 117).
-
Tennessee
Tennessee treats a lease guaranty as a suretyship subject to the Statute of Frauds (Tenn. Code § 29-2-101). The guaranty must be in writing and signed by the guarantor; Tennessee courts construe guaranties strictly and limit a guarantor's liability to the express terms of the agreement.
-
Minnesota
Minnesota treats a lease guaranty as a suretyship subject to the Statute of Frauds (Minn. Stat. § 513.01): the guaranty must be in writing and signed by the guarantor. Minnesota courts construe guaranties strictly and require unambiguous language to bind the guarantor to renewal terms.
-
Maryland
Maryland treats a lease guaranty as a suretyship subject to the Statute of Frauds (Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-901): the guaranty must be in writing and signed by the guarantor. Maryland courts construe guaranties strictly in favor of the guarantor and require clear language to extend liability beyond the original lease term.
-
Indiana
Indiana treats a lease guaranty as a suretyship subject to the Statute of Frauds (Ind. Code § 32-21-1-1): the guaranty must be in writing and signed by the guarantor. Indiana courts apply the rule of strictissimi juris and limit a guarantor's liability to the express terms of the agreement.