Which of these statements about responding to a breach of contract is blatantly false?

Terminating a lease does not automatically mean that the tenant is released from their obligation to pay further rent. Generally, when a lease is terminated due to a breach, it means that the lease agreement is no longer in effect, but it does not negate the tenant's liability for unpaid rent that accrued prior to termination or any additional terms specified in the lease regarding breach. In many jurisdictions, landlords still retain the right to pursue the tenant for the amount owed up to the date of termination, and any damages related to the breach or early termination of the lease.

The ability to collect remaining rent owed can depend heavily on local laws and the circumstances of the termination, which is why the statement about not being obligated to pay any more rent after termination is misleading and ultimately false. Keeping the lease in effect allows for pursuing unpaid rent, and if eviction is under consideration, terminating the lease is typically a necessary step, as it formally ends the contractual relationship. Even post-termination, a landlord may still collect for unpaid rent as outlined in the lease terms.