Digital Commons Network^™

Yorkville Plaza Assoc. Llc V. Guo

All Decisions

In this Good Cause Eviction Law (GCEL) holdover proceeding, the landlord sought to non-renew the tenant's month-to-month tenancy due to alleged nonpayment of rent under Real Property Law § 216(a)(i). The tenant moved to dismiss, arguing the absence of a formal lease and pleading defects. The landlord cross-moved to amend the petition. The court denied the tenant's motion, holding that RPL § 216(a)(i) does not mandate a formal rental agreement for non-renewal based on nonpayment, unlike summary nonpayment proceedings. The landlord's cross-motion to amend was granted. The court further clarified that "rent due and owing" under GCEL requires proof of …

Linden 305 Llc V. Miller

All Decisions

In this licensee holdover, the tenant moved to disqualify the landlord's counsel, arguing a conflict of interest because one of the firm's attorneys previously represented the tenant in a substantially related prior proceeding. The court found that a presumption of disqualification arose, but the landlord rebutted it by demonstrating that the attorney lived out of state, was not involved in the current proceeding, did not possess material information, and the firm had established an ethical wall. The court denied the tenant's motion but prohibited the firm from discussing the case with the attorney in question.

957 Park Avenue Llc V. Ordonez

All Decisions

The Appellate Term, First Department, affirmed a Civil Court final judgment awarding possession to the landlord in a holdover summary proceeding. The tenant, claiming succession rights as a non-traditional family member to a deceased rent-controlled tenant, failed to establish the requisite emotional and financial commitment and interdependence. The courts found the relationship was "one-sided," lacking mutual support as required by NY City Rent & Eviction Regs § 2204.6[d]. The decision highlights the high burden on a tenant seeking non-traditional family member succession, noting the trial court's warranted conclusion based on the asymmetric dynamic of the relationship.

2075 Creston Ave. Realty Llc V. Colon

All Decisions

In this nonpayment proceeding, the court granted the tenant's motion to amend their pro-se answer, finding the proposed defenses were not "palpably insufficient or devoid of merit." The court also granted limited discovery for the tenant's rent overcharge claim. The court rejected the landlord's argument that the claim was time-barred, applying *Matter of West Pierre Assoc. LLC v Harvey* because the tenancy commenced post-HSTPA. A single unexplained rent increase was deemed sufficient to render the rent history unreliable, justifying discovery to determine the legal rent.

Shoreview Holdings, Llc V. Fernandez

All Decisions

Landlord initiated a holdover proceeding, claiming exemption from GCEL as a "small landlord." Tenant moved to dismiss, arguing landlord's failure to comply with LLC law publication requirements, misdescription of premises, exceeding the "small landlord" unit count, and non-compliance of the predicate notice and petition with GCEL's ownership disclosure requirements. The court denied tenant's motion, ruling that late compliance with LLC law cures the defect, that premises description issues were amendable or triable, and that GCEL requires ownership disclosure in the petition (which can be amended) but not the predicate notice. The court granted landlord's motion to amend its affirmation and …

Reuven Holding, Ltd. V. Lopez

All Decisions

In this licensee holdover proceeding, the landlord obtained a judgment and warrant of eviction, leading to the tenant's eviction. The tenant subsequently filed a post-eviction Order to Show Cause seeking restoration, citing medical issues that impacted her ability to litigate and potential eligibility for HRA assistance. Balancing the equities, the court granted the tenant's motion under RPAPL § 749(3), ordering immediate restoration to possession. The re-execution of the warrant was stayed, conditioned upon the tenant's payment of stipulated rent arrears, plus marshal and legal fees, despite the landlord's strong objection.

Fort Washington Intercontinental Associates, Llc V. Ramirez

All Decisions

In this nonpayment proceeding, the court granted the tenant's motion for summary judgment and dismissed the petition. The landlord sought to recover rent from a residential tenant, but the tenant successfully argued that the building was in violation of Multiple Dwelling Law §§ 301 and 302. Specifically, the court found that the landlord had converted formerly residential units on the first floor into commercial medical offices, a use inconsistent with the building's I-Card. The court held that such commercial use, when inconsistent with a building's certificate of occupancy or I-Card, bars a landlord from recovering rent from any residential tenants …

470 Manhattan Ave. Llc. V Barboza

All Decisions

In this licensee holdover for an Interim Multiple Dwelling, the court granted the landlord's motion in its entirety. The tenant's personal jurisdiction defense was stricken because she asserted unrelated counterclaims for retaliatory eviction (inapplicable to non-tenants) and attorney's fees. The tenant's jury demand was also stricken, as the prior lease's jury waiver was a real covenant binding successors. The court granted discovery to the landlord regarding the tenant's succession defense and awarded ongoing use and occupancy under RPAPL § 745(2), finding landlord's good faith efforts to comply with Loft Law superseded the certificate of occupancy requirement. The tenant's cross-motion for …

Intercontinental St Nicholas Assoc. Llc V. Alvarado

All Decisions

In this nonpayment proceeding, the tenant moved to dismiss, arguing the landlord failed to obtain a valid certificate of occupancy (COO) after subdividing the apartment, violating Multiple Dwelling Law (MDL) § 301. The court found it undisputed that the apartment was altered requiring a new COO, which the landlord did not possess. Consequently, under MDL § 302(b), the landlord was barred from collecting rent for an apartment without a valid COO for the period of noncompliance. The court granted the tenant's motion, dismissing the nonpayment petition because the tenant has never lived in an apartment for which the landlord could …

395 East 151 St. Corp. V. Mhany Cluster Housing Development

All Decisions

In a rent-stabilized holdover for failure to sign a lease renewal, the court granted the occupant's motion to dismiss the petition against her (as "Jane Doe") for improper use of a pseudonym under CPLR 1024. The landlord claimed ignorance of her identity, but evidence showed it knew her name, having collected HRA payments on her behalf, and that she had interacted with management. The court denied the landlord's request to sua sponte join the occupant, finding her identity was known pre-commencement. The proceeding continues against the named tenant.

Zotpri Llc V. Burton

All Decisions

In this nonpayment proceeding, the tenant, after retaining counsel, moved to amend their pro se answer to assert affirmative defenses of payment, laches, and breach of the warranty of habitability, along with counterclaims. The landlord opposed, arguing untimeliness and insufficient pleading of laches. The court granted the tenant's motion, allowing the amended answer with the payment and warranty of habitability defenses and counterclaims. However, the laches defense was stricken for insufficient pleading, as it failed to demonstrate lack of notice or prejudice to the tenant, beyond mere delay, which are essential elements for an equitable laches claim.

Osibodu V. Fehintola

All Decisions

In this holdover-lease expiration proceeding, the tenant moved to reargue and renew a prior denied motion to dismiss, citing new facts. The tenant argued that the landlord's subsequent filing of a new holdover proceeding for the same unit, but with a contradictory description of the premises (basement unit vs. first floor unit), constituted an admission of the original petition's inadequacy. The court granted the tenant's motion, finding the new description contradicted the landlord's earlier representations and rendered the original premises description deficient under RPAPL § 741(3) for a marshal to execute a warrant with certainty. The proceeding was dismissed without …

Newstart Props. Inc V Hill

All Decisions

In this holdover proceeding, the landlord sought to evict the tenant for failing to sign a renewal lease for a Rent Stabilized apartment. After trial, the court dismissed the proceeding without prejudice, finding that the landlord's renewal lease offer was untimely under Rent Stabilization Code § 2523.5(a) because the previous lease expired in December 2021, but the offer was made in May 2024. Consequently, the landlord failed to comply with RSC § 2523.5(c)(1), which requires that untimely offers for renewal leases apply the rent guidelines rate in effect on the commencement date of the lease for which a timely offer …

515-517 West 171st Street Llc V. Sequin

All Decisions

A landlord initiated a licensee holdover proceeding. The tenant, son of the former rent-controlled tenant, moved for summary judgment on his succession defense, claiming he primarily resided with his deceased father. The court granted the tenant's motion, finding sufficient evidence of co-residency for the statutory period, even considering the father's time in a nursing home before death. The landlord failed to raise material issues of fact, and the petition was dismissed, establishing the tenant's right to succeed to the rent-controlled tenancy.

1451 Associates Lp V Jordan

All Decisions

The court vacated a pro se tenant's stipulation of settlement in a non-payment proceeding, finding that over 90% of the stipulated arrears were retroactive lump sum charges under Section 8. The HUD Handbook specifies such charges are not grounds for eviction or a possessory judgment, and housing courts cannot issue money judgments without possession. Additionally, the landlord failed to serve a 30-day rent demand required by the CARES Act for this federally-subsidized dwelling. Consequently, the petition was dismissed without prejudice.

Jupiter 7 6 Llc V. Quinn

All Decisions

In this Good Cause Eviction Law (GCEL) holdover proceeding based on the tenant's alleged nonpayment of rent, the court denied the tenant's pre-answer motion to dismiss the petition. The tenant argued that the predicate 90-day notice of termination lacked specific details regarding the alleged rent arrears. The court ruled that the predicate notice is sufficient if it generally apprises the tenant of the issues, deeming specific arrears information unnecessary at the earliest stage of the proceeding, thus disagreeing with other courts that require such detail. The court further elaborated on a three-step procedure for a tenant to cure nonpayment in …

155 Linden Llc V. Washington

All Decisions

In this nonpayment proceeding, the court granted the tenant's motion for leave to file an amended answer and for summary judgment. The landlord sought rent arrears for a Rent Stabilized apartment. The tenant argued that the landlord was barred from collecting rent due to open Department of Buildings (DOB) violations indicating occupancy contrary to the building's certificate of occupancy. Citing MDL §§ 301 and 302 and the controlling precedent of *Chazon, LLC v. Maugeneset*, the court found that the sixteen open DOB violations for unauthorized conversion of commercial space precluded the landlord from prosecuting the nonpayment action, regardless of whether …

Hellmuth Owners Corp. V. Kaplan

All Decisions

In this nonpayment proceeding for a co-op, the landlord moved to dismiss tenant's counterclaims and affirmative defenses, and the tenant cross-moved for discovery. The court largely granted the landlord's motion, severing many counterclaims (including monetary damages, injunctive, and declaratory relief) without prejudice due to Housing Court's limited subject matter jurisdiction. Several affirmative defenses were also dismissed without prejudice for being insufficiently pleaded or devoid of merit. However, the tenant's constructive eviction counterclaim was allowed to proceed. The tenant's motion for discovery was denied as overly broad.

155 Linden Llc V. Washington

All Decisions

In this nonpayment proceeding, the tenant moved for leave to amend their answer and for summary judgment on affirmative defenses under Multiple Dwelling Law (MDL) §§ 301 and 302. The court granted leave to amend and then granted summary judgment to the tenant. It was undisputed that the building had sixteen open Department of Building (DOB) violations and partial vacate orders for unauthorized conversion of commercial space into apartments, which contravened the certificate of occupancy. Citing *Chazon, LLC v. Maugeneset*, the court held that these violations precluded the landlord from collecting rent, regardless of whether the tenant's specific unit was …

Hp Acp Housing Development Fund Company, Inc. As Nominee For Bsp 204-206 W 135 Llc And Bsp 204-206 W 135 2 Llc V. Bagwell

All Decisions

In a nonpayment proceeding, the tenant moved for leave to conduct discovery regarding an affirmative defense of rent overcharge, citing irregularities in the rent registration history including significant unexplained rent increases. Applying the principles of *W. Pierre Assoc. LLC v. Harvey*, the court found ample need for discovery, noting that the tenancy and alleged overcharge occurred post-HSTPA and that investigation of the basis for substantial rent increases from 1995-1997 and 2010-2011 was necessary to determine the reliability of the base date rent. The court granted the tenant's motion for discovery, ordering production of relevant documents but striking interrogatories and one …

730 Gc Realty Corp V. Beltre

All Decisions

The landlord initiated a nonpayment proceeding against the tenants. Respondent-tenant Gerald Flores, after answering, moved to dismiss the case. The Civil Court granted the motion and dismissed the proceeding without prejudice, finding the landlord failed to file an affidavit of service for the notice of petition and petition. Citing appellate precedent, the court held that the failure to timely file proof of service constitutes a jurisdictional defect, preventing the landlord from establishing personal jurisdiction over the tenants and mandating dismissal under RPAPL § 733(1).

167 8th Ave. Llc V Goldstein

All Decisions

The Appellate Term reversed a money judgment and reinstated a tenant's rent overcharge defenses and counterclaims, remanding for reconsideration. While the appeal regarding possession was dismissed as moot due to the tenant's eviction, the monetary claims persisted. The court held that recent legislative amendments (L. 2024, Ch. 95 § 4) mandating a "totality of the circumstances" standard for fraudulent deregulation claims apply to pending cases. This new standard, more favorable to tenants, requires the lower court to determine if the landlord knowingly engaged in a fraudulent scheme to remove the apartment from rent stabilization.

Red, White-, And Blue-Collar Crime: Federal Sentencing Practices Among White-Collar And Blue-Collar Offenders, Henna Judge

Fordham Law Review

Under the current federal sentencing regime, district courts exercise immense amounts of discretion when sentencing. Though strict adherence to the U.S. Sentencing Commission Guidelines (the “Guidelines”) was once mandatory, courts must now use these Guidelines as an advisory starting point and make a series of fact-specific determinations when sentencing a defendant. Though judicial discretion in this realm aids in preventing undue reliance on Guidelines-range recommendations that can lack nuance, it also invites bias.

In recent years, scholars and courts alike have called attention to a potential disparity in the way blue-collar and white-collar offenders are sentenced. This Note examines relevant …

Federal Courts, Class Actions, And The Jurisdictional Void, Courtney T. Welch

Fordham Law Review

To invoke the jurisdiction of a federal court, a plaintiff must satisfy the requirements of Article III. Among other things, Article III requires a plaintiff to have and maintain personal stake throughout the lifespan of the litigation. Though a simple premise, this constitutional requirement has a complicated history. This is especially true as applied to class action lawsuits, where plaintiffs bring claims both on behalf of themselves and other harmed individuals.

The U.S. Supreme Court has applied flexible rules to some—but not all—of Article III’s requirements in class actions. The breadth of this flexibility, though, is uncertain. Accordingly, so too …

Ai Procurement As Regulatory Reconnaissance, Sam Adler

Fordham Law Review

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a black box technology in a black box industry. Some view AI as a life-changing technology capable of advancing society and perhaps even saving the world, while others fear its capacity to harm. Like Dr. Frankenstein, developers fear the unpredictability of their own creations; deployers fear the unknown risks of third-party AI tools that market pressures drive them to assume; members of civil society fear AI’s capacity to oppress the already oppressed and degrade trust in institutions; and everyday users fear the undisclosed potential of AI to cause harm by means they cannot readily comprehend. These …

Not So Firmly Settled: How The Inconsistent Jurisprudence Of The Firm Resettlement Bar Serves As A Tool For Asylum Seeker Exclusion, Caroline V. Garrido

Fordham Law Review

The firm resettlement bar to asylum, designed to limit protections to those without refuge elsewhere, has become a source of inconsistency, confusion, and exclusion in U.S. asylum law. Circuit courts have adopted two different approaches for determining whether an asylum seeker has firmly resettled in a third country. Despite the Board of Immigration Appeals’ attempt to unify these approaches through the introduction of a burden-shifting framework, courts remain divided, and there is no clear guidance on what constitutes firm resettlement. This Note argues that this lack of guidance has led to inconsistent court holdings and interpretations that conflict with the …

Separation-Of-Powers Lochnerism, Andrea Scoseria Katz

Fordham Law Review

One hundred and twenty years ago, in 1905, the U.S. Supreme Court rendered one of the single most notorious opinions in history, striking down a New York labor law for violating the right to contract—a right found nowhere in the text of the Constitution. Though the era of Lochner v. New York is well past us, the judicial impulses that gave rise to the case remain. With a new champion in the Roberts Court, Lochnerism is alive and well, deployed in a new context to redefine the relationships between the president, Congress, federal agencies, and the courts.

Bringing together two …

The Equal Pay Act’S Hidden Loophole: Eliminating Prior Compensation As A “Factor Other Than Sex”, Madeleine Bol

Fordham Law Review

The Equal Pay Act of 1963 (EPA or the “Act”) prohibits employers from engaging in sex-based wage discrimination. The Act includes four exceptions that allow an employer to circumvent liability, the last of which allows for pay disparities when the “differential [is] based on any other factor other than sex.” The language of this exceedingly broad exception raises questions among courts on what “other than sex” entails—specifically, whether a court can rely on an employee’s prior compensation to justify a pay disparity between employees of the opposite sex. This Note examines how federal circuit courts have interpreted this catchall exception. …

A True Fact Should Not Be Controversial: Analyzing The Zauderer Standard And Defining “Uncontroversial”, Edina Hartstein

Fordham Law Review

In Zauderer v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel, the U.S. Supreme Court recognized an exception to the compelled speech doctrine that allowed the government to regulate commercial speech if it was “purely factual and uncontroversial.” However, the Court failed to define what it meant for a disclosure to be “purely factual” or what it meant to be “uncontroversial.” This lack of clarity led to lower courts inconsistently applying the Zauderer standard. In 2018, the Supreme Court decided National Institute for Family Life & Advocates v. Becerra (NIFLA), which held that the Zauderer standard cannot apply when the disclosure …

Settling On A Standard: Reviewing The Right To Self-Representation, Lauren Lipson

Fordham Law Review

Courts appoint counsel for indigent criminal defendants who cannot afford legal representation to uphold their Sixth Amendment rights. In its seminal waiver case, Faretta v. California, the U.S. Supreme Court elevated the corollary right—the right to self-representation—to constitutional status. In dicta, the Court created a standard by which defendants must waive their right to counsel “knowingly and intelligently” to proceed pro se. The Court subsequently sculpted the right to self-representation as it came to standby counsel and mental competency, but it never prescribed a precise waiver colloquy for district court judges to administer, causing the Faretta colloquy to look …