Digital Commons Network^™

Useini V. Jamaluddin

All Decisions

In this holdover proceeding, the tenant moved to dismiss for landlord's alleged failure to comply with Good Cause Eviction Law (GCEL) disclosure requirements, arguing the predicate notice was fatally defective. The landlord cross-moved to amend the petition. The court denied the tenant's motion, holding that the GCEL notice under RPL § 231-c only requires the landlord to check the appropriate exemption box, not disclose detailed ownership information. The court granted the landlord's motion to amend the petition, allowing the case to proceed, noting that the landlord bears the burden of proving the truth of its allegations at trial.

Damir Realty Corp V. Hernandez

All Decisions

Court granted respondent's cross-motion to dismiss for failure to comply with RPAPL § 735(2), which requires proof of service to be filed within three days of service, and denied petitioner's motion to deem the affidavits timely filed under CPLR § 2001. Applying the First Department's strict compliance standard from Riverside Syndicate v Saltzman, the court held that because service was by conspicuous place delivery rather than personal delivery, service was not complete until proof was filed, rendering the defect jurisdictional and not curable by CPLR § 2001.

University Riverview Assoc. V. Chisholm

All Decisions

Court denied discovery, granted landlord's cross-motion to amend the petition to allege GCEL coverage, but then dismissed the amended petition under RPAPL § 741(4) for failure to state any facts about unpaid rent due and owing. Court held that the GCEL ground of nonpayment (RPL § 216[1][a][i]) requires the petition to allege specific facts about unpaid rent, and that alleging only a sum of use and occupancy owed was insufficient because 'rent' and 'U&O' are legally distinct terms, and failure to pay use and occupancy does not constitute a 'good cause' ground for lease non-renewal under GCEL.

Naipaul V. Lazarao

All Decisions

Court granted respondent's motion for discovery on a de facto rent stabilization claim after petitioner failed to oppose the motion despite three adjournments granted at petitioner's request over six months. Court exercised its authority to decide the motion on default, finding that further adjournment would encourage dilatory behavior, and that there was in any event good cause to allow discovery on the respondent's de facto rent stabilization defense.

Masaryk Towers Corp V. Tennassee

All Decisions

Court dismissed nuisance holdover in this Mitchell-Lama cooperative apartment for failure to comply with mandatory notice requirements in the Occupancy Agreement. Petitioner failed to serve a notice to cure and a 30-day notice of termination as required by the Occupancy Agreement's plain language, notwithstanding that HPD's Mitchell-Lama regulations do not expressly impose these requirements, and petitioner also failed to obtain the requisite vote of the Board of Directors to terminate the Occupancy Agreement.

April 2026, Maloney Library, Fordham University School Of Law

Maloney Matters

No abstract provided.

The Nondiscrimination Principle, Zephyr Teachout

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Turner V. Jp Morgan Chase Bank National Association

All Decisions

In this illegal lockout proceeding, the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, following an inquest due to the landlord-respondents' non-appearance, awarded a final judgment of possession to the tenant-petitioner. The court found that the tenant was unlawfully deprived of possession when the apartment doors were sealed. The landlord was ordered to provide the tenant with a key and remove structures barring entry, allowing access to belongings. Full possession is contingent upon the lifting of an HPD vacate order, which was issued due to the landlord's failure to maintain essential services like heat and hot water.

335 E. 70th Realty Inc. V. Potente

All Decisions

Court denied plaintiff-landlord's motion to dismiss defendant-tenant's counterclaim under New York's Anti-SLAPP Law (Civil Rights Law §§ 70-a and 76-a) in this civil action for damages. Court granted defendant-tenant's motion to stay the civil damages action under CPLR 2201 pending resolution of a parallel nuisance holdover proceeding between the same parties, finding that the holdover determination would likely dispose of or substantially limit the issues in the damages action.

Lawless Antitrust, John M. Newman

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Public Utility Law As Anti-Oligarchy Regulation, Ganesh Sitaraman

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Ai, Antitrust, And The Marketplace Of Ideas, Maurice E. Stucke

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Revival Of Section 5: A Return To The Ftc’S Roots In A Time Of Democratic Crisis, Shaoul Sussman

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Why Capitalism Needs Democracy And Democracy Needs Capitalism, Luigi Zingales

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Antitrust And Economic Liberty, Doha Mekki

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Is Tax “Law”?, Luís C. Calderón Gómez

Fordham Law Review

Although taxation remains a hotly contested issue in debates by both politicians and political theorists—over the optimal size of government, distributive (and sometimes corrective) justice, or even the legitimacy of current private property arrangements—taxation has been largely ignored by legal theorists, to the detriment of both tax law and legal theory. This Article argues that tax law, driven by its battle against tax evasion, is in deep conflict with widely accepted conceptions of “legality”—that is, the qualities that make a rule distinctively and normatively “law.” This matters because legality is a key buttress in jurisprudential and political theory accounts that …

False Conflict: Colorblindness And Section 2 Of The Voting Rights Act, W. Kerrel Murray

Fordham Law Review

If friends and foes of section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 agree on one thing, it is the irrepressible conflict between section 2’s attention to race and constitutional colorblindness. They’re wrong. Rightly understood, section 2’s design is remarkably compatible with colorblind constitutionalism’s letter and spirit.

To show how, this Article first returns to section 2’s origins and the preexisting approach its text codifies. That approach had an underappreciated ethos: When intentional discrimination’s effects sufficiently distort a political system, an electoral rule’s results might impugn its unconstitutionality, even if the rule had been adopted without discriminatory purpose. Drawing …

Minimal Success: The Consequences Of Mandatory Minimums In Youth Sentencing, Maya Chrobot

Fordham Law Review

In New York State, children as young as thirteen can be processed as adults and sentenced to mandatory minimum sentences. Mandatory minimum sentences require judges to sentence the defendant to a statutorily set minimum term of imprisonment. Practitioners, judges, and researchers question the efficacy of mandatory minimum sentences, finding that they are ineffective at deterring crime, decreasing bias in sentencing, and increasing community safety. Additionally, there is clear evidence about the damaging effects of incarceration on young adults. Instead of functioning as rehabilitative punishment, incarceration leads young adults to experience poor mental and physical health outcomes upon release, and they …

Interrogation Of Regents And Administrative Reliance Interests In The Context Of Vacillating Immigration Policy, Sarah Engelberg-Nolan

Fordham Law Review

Arbitrary and capricious review under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) operates as an important agency-accountability tool when invoked as intended. But the recent U.S. Supreme Court case Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California and subsequent lower federal court cases have opened the floodgates to a more searching and potentially activist review. In Regents, the Court held that the administration of President Donald J. Trump could not rescind the discretionary immigration program Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) in the manner the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) attempted, in part because DHS failed to …

Lessons Learned From Global Responses To Criminal Abortion Laws, Cynthia Soohoo

Fordham Law Review Online

No abstract provided.

Asking Hospitals To Do Their Share, Kimberly Mutcherson

Fordham Law Review Online

No abstract provided.

Law's Limits: Abortion And The Social Determinants Of Health, Maya Manian

Fordham Law Review Online

No abstract provided.

Abortion, Power And The Future Of Healthcare, Elizabeth Kukura

Fordham Law Review Online

No abstract provided.

Continued Resistance And Resilience After Dobbs, David S. Cohen, Carole Joffe

Fordham Law Review Online

No abstract provided.

Bedrock Equities Llc V. Husain

All Decisions

Court denied tenant's motion to dismiss GCEL holdover premised on nonpayment of rent under RPL § 216(1)(a)(i), holding that a predicate 90-day notice of termination need not include specific factual allegations regarding the amounts of rent arrears or the months unpaid. Court noted that the landlord still bears the burden of proof at trial including demonstrating good cause to evict, the tenant retains numerous defenses, and a post-trial cure is available under RPAPL § 751(1) as incorporated by RPL § 216(3).

Wagab Llc V Medina

All Decisions

In this Good Cause Eviction Law (GCEL) holdover proceeding, the landlord sought possession due to the tenant's alleged failure to pay rent, leading to a non-renewal of the lease. The tenant moved to dismiss, arguing the predicate notice of non-renewal and termination was defective for lacking specific details about the alleged nonpayment, such as amounts owed or dates due. The Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County, granted the tenant's motion, dismissing the petition without prejudice. The court held that under GCEL, a predicate notice alleging nonpayment as good cause must include detailed factual allegations beyond a …

Lekhner V 205-54 House Inc.

All Decisions

The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's dismissal of an evicted cooperative tenant's claims for money damages. The tenant, whose shares were auctioned to satisfy a nonpayment judgment, argued the landlord had an implied contractual duty to conduct the auction with a minimum bid to protect her profit. The court found no such implied contract. Additionally, the tenant's claim under RPAPL § 702, challenging non-maintenance charges in the prior nonpayment judgment, was barred by res judicata as the issue had been litigated. The landlord's motion to dismiss the complaint was properly granted.

52 Henry Street Realty Llc V. Jiang

All Decisions

In this nonpayment proceeding against a rent-stabilized tenant, the court granted the tenant's motion to amend the answer and for summary judgment, dismissing the landlord's petition without prejudice. The landlord's petition was dismissed because the predicate rent demand was fatally defective. The defect stemmed from the rent demand and its attached ledger including late fees alongside rent arrears, which is impermissible in a summary nonpayment proceeding under RPAPL § 702(1). The court held that a predicate notice containing such impermissible charges renders the demand fatally defective and cannot be cured by amendment.

Abj 105 Llc V. Ramos

All Decisions

The landlord commenced four holdover proceedings based on allegations of license termination. The parties, represented by counsel, settled the cases via stipulations recognizing the tenants as Rent-Stabilized and setting rents. The landlord moved to vacate the stipulations, claiming its attorney lacked authority due to "law office failure" and "miscommunication," a unilateral mistake. Tenants cross-moved for sanctions. The court denied the landlord's motion, finding insufficient cause to vacate the settlement, emphasizing that a unilateral mistake by the attorney, absent mutual mistake or fraud by the other party, is not grounds for vacatur. The court also denied the tenants' motion for sanctions, …

Marcus Garvey Preservation Llc V. Chappelle

All Decisions

In this nuisance/breach of lease holdover proceeding, the tenant moved to compel the landlord to substantively respond to a demand for a bill of particulars. The court found the landlord's initial responses "boilerplate and evasive" and insufficient. The court granted the tenant's motion, ordering the landlord to supplement the bill of particulars by a specific date. A conditional and self-executing preclusion order was issued, which will prevent the landlord from entering the requested particulars into evidence if they fail to comply fully and timely, thereby limiting their ability to prove their prima facie case.