Digital Commons Network^™

Churchill House, L.P. V. Marshall

All Decisions

In a licensee holdover involving a HUD Section 236/Low Income Housing Tax Credit apartment, the court dismissed the respondent's succession claim, granting the landlord a final judgment of possession and money judgment for use and occupancy. The court acknowledged that federal regulations and caselaw for subsidized apartments do not mandate the fixed co-residency periods of rent-regulated contexts nor require inclusion on household compositions. However, the respondent's testimonial evidence of co-residency with her deceased father for "a suitable duration" to establish membership in the family unit was found lacking in credibility and consistency, failing to prove her succession rights.

Real Estate Board Of New York, Inc. V. The City Of New York

All Decisions

The court denied a preliminary injunction against New York City's FARE Act, which shifts broker fee payment from tenants to landlords. The judge granted in part the City's motion to dismiss, striking down plaintiffs' First Amendment, New York State Constitution, and state law preemption claims. However, the Contracts Clause claim was allowed to proceed. The court emphasized that it cannot overturn legislation based on policy disagreements.

Jerome Enters. Llc V. Javed

All Decisions

The court granted the tenant's motion to dismiss the landlord's nonpayment case because the building lacked a valid Certificate of Occupancy, which prohibits the collection of rent. The court also held the landlord in civil contempt for failing to comply with a prior so-ordered stipulation to make repairs, which prejudiced the tenant's ability to secure a Section 8 voucher. The landlord's petition was dismissed, but the case was restored to the calendar for a pre-trial conference to address the tenant's counterclaims and determine damages for the contempt finding.

Pechman V. Lane

All Decisions

In a holdover proceeding initiated by new co-op shareholders who acquired shares via judicial execution, the court denied their motion to set aside a prior order denying a default judgment. The landlord incorrectly predicated the holdover on RPAPL § 713(1) and § 713(7), arguing the former proprietary lessee was a licensee. The court reaffirmed that these sections do not apply to former proprietary lessees; rather, RPAPL § 711(1) for holdover tenants is the proper vehicle. The court emphasized that cooperative shares are considered personal property for these purposes, preventing the application of "real property" sale provisions under RPAPL § 713(1).

Beverly Holdings N.Y., Llc V. Blackwood

All Decisions

In this nonpayment proceeding, the court affirmed the dismissal of the petition, granting the tenant's motion for summary judgment. The tenant successfully used Multiple Dwelling Law § 302-a as an affirmative defense, proving that the landlord failed to correct rent-impairing violations in the building's public areas for over six months. The court rejected the landlord's argument of lack of access, as the violations were not within the tenant's apartment. It also dismissed the landlord's claim that the tenant failed to certify the uncorrected violations, noting that the landlord's own failure to file a certification of compliance established a prima facie …

Westchester Capital Co., Llc V. Richardson

All Decisions

The court dismissed the landlord's holdover petition, granting the tenant's motion to dismiss. The court found the petition fatally defective for failing to plead the tenant's protected status as a non-purchasing tenant under the Martin Act. Additionally, the predicate 90-day notice was deemed insufficient as it vaguely alleged a "poor history of making rent payments on time" without specific details, failing to establish "good cause" for eviction required by the Martin Act. The court denied the landlord's cross-motion to amend and the tenant's summary judgment motion as moot.

Nazor V. Sydney Sol Group, Ltd.

All Decisions

In this loft tenant action, the court modified the lower court's order, reinstating claims for rent overcharge, unjust enrichment, and breach of warranty of habitability. The court held that court-ordered use and occupancy payments are not "voluntarily paid" rent under MDL § 302(b), allowing these claims to proceed in a related action. The court also reinstated a claim for accounting of the security deposit and attorneys' fees, finding the landlord failed to prove non-commingling. However, claims for harassment, retaliatory eviction, and constructive eviction were dismissed.

Hudson Shore Associates Limited Partnership, Haven On The Hudson Llc, Kenneth Levinson, And Hudson Valley Property Owners Association Et Al. V. State Of New York, New York State Division Of Housing And Community Renewal, Village Of Nyack, New York, And City Of Poughkeepsie, New York

All Decisions

Landlords challenged New York's Vacancy Provisions, alleging Fourth Amendment violations for warrantless searches of rent rolls and Fourteenth Amendment due process violations concerning vacancy calculations. The court affirmed dismissal, holding that Article 78 proceedings provide sufficient pre-compliance review for record demands, and the low risk of coercion mitigates Fourth Amendment concerns. Due process was satisfied by opportunities for landlords to contest vacancy calculations through public hearings and subsequent Article 78 review, ensuring constitutional muster.

Bedford 203 Lp V. Santana

All Decisions

In a nuisance holdover case, the court partially granted the tenant's motion to dismiss, specifically dismissing allegations that the tenant's behavior "annoyed" other tenants, as the lease required a notice to cure for such conduct, which the landlord failed to provide. However, the court allowed the remaining nuisance allegations to stand, finding no notice to cure was required for conduct impacting building staff or the landlord's guests. The court also permitted the landlord to amend the petition to correctly reflect the apartment's regulatory status as part of the NYC 15/15 Project Based Program, finding no prejudice to the tenant.

Rojas V. Cruger Associates Limited Partnership

All Decisions

In this source of income discrimination case, the plaintiff tenant, obtained a preliminary injunction preventing the landlord, from commencing a nonpayment proceeding. The court found that the landlord repeatedly obstructed tenant's attempt to use her Emergency Housing Voucher for "leasing in place" by refusing to submit necessary paperwork, citing arrears, and failing to provide a valid Tax ID. The injunction was granted to preserve tenant's voucher and residency, emphasizing the landlord's obligation under New York City and State Human Rights Laws to accept lawful sources of income.

343 E 173 Llc V. Estrella

All Decisions

The court denied the tenant's motion to vacate a default judgment in a nonpayment case. The tenant failed to provide a reasonable excuse for not appearing in court after answering the petition. Additionally, the court disapproved of the more than two-month delay by the tenant's counsel in moving to vacate the default judgment, which was filed only after an eviction notice was issued. Consequently, the judgment and warrant remained in effect.

Lev Realty Group, Llc V. Nassar

All Decisions

The court denied the tenant's motions to dismiss a holdover petition alleging unreasonable refusal of access for repairs. The court held that weekend access for repairs is permissible if the tenant consents or if Class C violations or other serious conditions requiring immediate repair exist. Further, the court ruled that the proceeding was not moot, even though the tenant eventually provided access and repairs were completed. While acknowledging that an eviction was unlikely given the cure, the court emphasized that the landlord still maintained a cause of action and was entitled to a trial to determine possessory rights as they …

Rp Wimbledon Owner, Llc V. Chisholm

All Decisions

A landlord's motion to reargue a holdover case, based on non-renewal for alleged arrears under RPL § 226-c, was denied. The court reiterated that even pre-amendment RPL § 226-c notices, when based on nonpayment under the Good Cause Eviction Law (GCEL), must reasonably inform the tenant of the exact sum owed and its calculation to allow for a cure. The court found that simply stating a lump sum of arrears without detailing the periods of nonpayment was insufficient under RPAPL § 741(4), affirming its prior dismissal despite the landlord's argument for liberal construction.

Ricketts V. Holloway

All Decisions

In this no-grounds holdover proceeding, the court granted the tenant's motion to dismiss because the petition contained an incorrect description of the premises. The tenant provided conclusive evidence, including prior court records and physical apartment labels, that he resides on the third floor, Apartment 3, not the second floor, Apartment 2, as alleged by the landlord. The court rejected the landlord's argument that a 2012 lease with the incorrect address should control, citing established caselaw requiring an accurate description for marshal identification, and noting the landlord provided no personal knowledge to refute the tenant's claims.

Ford V. Ford

All Decisions

The Appellate Term affirmed the Civil Court's order denying the tenant's motion to dismiss or for summary judgment and granting the landlord's cross-motion to amend the petition in a licensee holdover proceeding. Key legal points included that a trust's trustee is the proper party to maintain an action, and amendment to substitute the trustee is appropriate where, as here, the trustee signed relevant documents and no prejudice was shown. The court also found the conspicuous-place service of the predicate notice and petition was proper, supported by three attempts at different times. Additionally, the tenant's documentary evidence did not conclusively refute …

One Arden Partners Lp V. Butler

All Decisions

In a nonpayment case, the court awarded the tenant a significant rent abatement (63%) due to severe apartment conditions. The landlord established its prima facie case for arrears. However, the tenant successfully demonstrated a breach of the warranty of habitability, proving extensive rat infestation (15-60% abatement), lead paint and leak issues (15% abatement), and a defective apartment door (7% abatement). The court calculated a total abatement of $37,337.68, reducing the landlord's money judgment to $21,575.02.

75-89 Wadsworth Terrace Llc V. Vines

All Decisions

In a licensee holdover proceeding for a rent-stabilized apartment, the court granted the tenant's motion to stay the proceeding. The tenant, claiming succession rights to her deceased grandmother's tenancy, had an application pending before the DHCR. Despite the landlord's argument for concurrent jurisdiction and an expeditious determination, the court found no specific showing of prejudice by the landlord. The stay, granted under CPLR § 2201 to avoid duplicative adjudications, is conditioned on the tenant's timely payment of rent in ongoing use and occupancy, commencing June 2025. The stay will remain in effect until August 31, 2025, or a DHCR determination, …

Ruzieva V. Ldrisov

All Decisions

In this holdover proceeding, the tenant's oral motion to dismiss was granted due to the landlord's failure to properly complete service. The court found prejudice to the tenant as the affidavit of service was filed ten months after commencement, making service incomplete under RPAPL § 735(2)(b). Furthermore, the landlord failed to comply with RPAPL § 733(1) regarding the timeframe for service completion relative to the hearing date. Citing First and Second Department appellate authority, the court applied a strict compliance standard for service requirements, dismissing the petition without prejudice due to these jurisdictional defects.

Rose V. Gazivoda 118 Llc

All Decisions

In this rent overcharge action, the tenant's motion to renew their request for summary judgment was granted, but their motion for summary judgment was ultimately denied. The court affirmed that the pre-HSTPA look-back period applies to overcharges accrued before HSTPA's enactment, consistent with *Matter of Regina Metro. Co.* While acknowledging a statutory change (L. 2024, Ch. 95 § 4) mandating a "totality of the circumstances" standard for fraudulent deregulation claims (J-51), the court found insufficient evidence to grant summary judgment. Disputed issues of fact regarding the landlord's knowledge and intent in deregulating the apartment necessitate a trial to determine if …

Yaaron, Llc V. Swanson

All Decisions

In this non-payment proceeding, the tenant successfully moved to dismiss the petition, with the landlord's cross-motion to amend being denied. The court determined the apartment remained Rent Stabilized, rejecting the landlord's claim of high-rent vacancy deregulation. The landlord failed to comply with pre-HSTPA deregulation requirements, including providing proper notice and registering a lawful rent with DHCR. The court found the landlord's purported "free market" lease rent unlawful and never registered, rendering the petition and rent demand defective. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition, affirming that a non-payment proceeding cannot be maintained without registering the legal regulated rent.

217 E. 93 Llc V. Edwards

All Decisions

In a post-stipulation holdover for lease expiration, the tenant moved to stay execution of a warrant of eviction beyond the stipulated vacate date. The landlord opposed, arguing that RPAPL §753 imposed a one-year time bar on such relief. The court analyzed the statutory tension between RPAPL §§749(3), 753, and CPLR §2201, concluding that §749(3) governs post-issuance stays and lacks a temporal limit. It exercised discretion to extend the eviction stay until June 17, 2025, citing the tenant's health, minor children with educational needs, and lack of prejudice to the landlord. The decision clarifies that courts retain discretion under RPAPL §749(3) …

Administrative Appeal Decision - Donaldson, Oscar (2025-05-01)

Parole Administrative Appeal Decisions

No abstract provided.

Sales V. Justiniano

All Decisions

In this action for injunctive relief, tenants moved by OSC for a preliminary injunction to compel repairs, cease repair-related harassment, and address ongoing violations in a building lacking a valid certificate of occupancy. The landlord opposed. The court granted all prongs of the motion, citing a likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm due to deteriorating conditions, and a balance of equities favoring the tenants. The landlord was ordered to coordinate access for inspections and repairs, cease harassing conduct, and comply with HPD and DOB mandates. The court also maintained an existing rent escrow due to the building's lack …

685 1st Ave Llc V. Cai

All Decisions

In this lease expiration holdover, the landlord sought possession after the tenant failed to execute a renewal lease offered via an online platform. The landlord claimed exemption from RPL § 226-c's notice requirement, arguing its earlier lease offer (below a 5% increase) precluded the need for further notice. The court disagreed, finding that once the landlord decided not to renew the lease, it was obligated to serve a written nonrenewal notice. The court also held that electronic lease offers did not satisfy statutory notice requirements because they violated the lease's specific notice provision requiring service by mail. Additionally, the lease …

Does The Major Questions Doctrine Apply To The Federal Courts?, Michael Coenen, Seth Davis

Fordham Law Review

The new “major questions doctrine” (MQD) requires courts to apply a “distinct” approach to statutory interpretation when reviewing challenges to an agency action of “vast economic and political significance.” Under that approach, courts must assume that such an action exceeds the scope of that agency’s statutory authority unless there exists “clear congressional authorization” for it. In this Article, we examine whether this new rule for administrative agencies (or what we call the “agency MQD”) implies the existence of a similarly strong constraint on the federal courts’ power to interpret and apply statutes for themselves (or what we call the “judicial …

Litigating Corporate Risk, Henry B. Blaikie

Fordham Law Review

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) requires companies to disclose risk factors in Item 105 of Regulation S-K, which calls for “a discussion of the material factors that make an investment speculative or risky.” Whether companies incur liability for omitting or mischaracterizing risk factors in their disclosures is the subject of a three-way split between eight federal courts of appeals. The majority approach among the circuits—consisting of the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the First, Second, Third, Fifth, Tenth, and District of Columbia Circuits—imposes liability when companies omit or mischaracterize a risk factor that, at the time of disclosure, is …

Text, Context, Or Both?: Considering When And How To Use Statutory History In The New Textualist Framework, Devon Brostoff

Fordham Law Review

Statutory history represents the evolution of a statute through enacted amendments. Although textualists have widely rejected traditional forms of legislative history, statutory history has not received the same fate. Instead, textualists have accepted the use of statutory history as a resource separate from—and superior to—legislative history. Thus, this Note examines how courts are using statutory history, focusing primarily on the author’s analysis of a set of courts of appeals cases that rely on statutory history. Using these cases, this Note explores whether statutory history is best understood as text or context within the interpretation process. Further, this Note challenges the …

When Prenatal Care Becomes A Crime, Casey Hunter

Fordham Law Review

For decades, pregnant women have increasingly faced criminalization for their actions and conduct during pregnancy, with Alabama emerging as a focal point due to its aggressive use of section 26-15-3.2: Chemical Endangerment of Exposing a Child to an Environment in Which Controlled Substances Are Produced or Distributed. Originally intended to protect children from the dangers of methamphetamine labs, this law has been reinterpreted to prosecute pregnant women who test positive for controlled substances. Central to these prosecutions are positive drug tests obtained from prenatal health records, causing many women to avoid prenatal care for fear of legal consequences.

This Note …

“Shipping” Away The Captive Audience Meeting, Nathan Kakalec

Fordham Law Review

On November 14, 2024, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) overturned seventy-six years of labor law precedent by banning captive audience meetings in Amazon.com Services LLC. Captive audience meetings, mandatory meetings where employers discuss unionization with their employees, were a powerful anti-union tool used by employers to coerce their employees into rejecting unionization. The NLRB argues that captive audience meetings are inconsistent with § 7 and § 8 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). Employers reject the NLRB’s assertion and contend that banning captive audience meetings infringes on their First Amendment right to communicate their views on unionization. …

“The Gun’S Not Mine!”: The Admissibility Of Defendants’ Exculpatory Hearsay Statements Under Federal Rules Of Evidence 803(2) & (3), Faustino S. Galante

Fordham Law Review Online

Exculpatory hearsay statements made by criminal defendants often warrant admission under the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) as excited utterances, under Rule 803(2), or as statements reflecting a then-existing state of mind, under Rule 803(3). Nevertheless, defendants often struggle to have their exculpatory statements admitted pursuant to these rules—even when those statements fulfill their categorical requirements.

This Comment surveys the different approaches courts take to determine whether exculpatory hearsay statements made by criminal defendants are admissible under Rules 803(2) and (3). It argues that courts too often misapply these rules to exclude defendants’ exculpatory statements. In particular, courts counteract the …