18742 research outputs found
Sort by
3612 BROADWAY PARTNERS LLC v. MORENO
A landlord\u27s motion for a default judgment was denied, and the court granted a tenant\u27s motion for leave to file a late answer in a non-payment proceeding. The court reasoned that a meritorious defense is not an essential element for a late answer motion when no default judgment has been entered. The court was persuaded by the short, eight-day delay between the tenant\u27s counsel appearing and filing the motion. Citing a lack of prejudice to the landlord and the public policy of resolving cases on their merits, the court granted the tenant\u27s motion
Zeydelis v. Yershov
A holdover petition was dismissed after the court granted the tenant\u27s motion for summary judgment. The court found that the notice of petition was defective because it did not comply with the form mandated by 22 NYCRR 208.42(b) and Administrative Order 163/19. Citing precedent from other courts, the judge held that even minor technical defects can be grounds for dismissal. The court declined to rule on the tenant\u27s separate argument regarding the landlord\u27s acceptance of rent, as the defective notice of petition was sufficient grounds for dismissal
JANEL TOWERS LLC v. ABOAGYE
In this nonprimary residence holdover proceeding, the landlord moved to restore the case for immediate trial five years after it was marked off calendar for discovery. The court denied the motion, finding the landlord failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the lengthy delay, a lack of prejudice to the tenant, or to address the merits of the underlying nonprimary residence claim. Citing Appellate Term precedent, the court emphasized that a motion to restore, filed more than one year after a case is stricken, requires proof of merit, lack of prejudice, lack of intent to abandon, and a reasonable excuse for delay. The landlord\u27s allegation of unpaid use and occupancy was deemed an insufficient basis to warrant restoration
Inga v. Revenco
The court partially granted the landlord\u27s motion to amend the petition to include GCEL applicability and good cause grounds, and partially granted the tenant\u27s motion to amend her answer. It denied the tenant\u27s motion to dismiss outright. While the initial predicate notice served before GCEL\u27s enactment was valid, the petition filed afterward needed to conform. The court allowed the landlord to proceed on the **non-payment of rent** ground, finding it sufficiently pleaded with specific amounts and dates, but dismissed the **nuisance** and **illegal sublet** grounds due to lack of factual specificity in the petition
Rogers Realty LLC. v. Phillip
In this nonpayment proceeding, the tenant moved to amend her answer and dismiss the case, arguing the landlord failed to comply with LLCL § 206 by not publishing its incorporation details when the action commenced. The landlord submitted proof of belated publication. The court granted the tenant\u27s motion to amend the answer but denied the motion to dismiss. It held that the landlord\u27s failure to comply with LLCL § 206 at the time of commencement was not a jurisdictional defect and could be cured nunc pro tunc by subsequent publication, thereby allowing the landlord to maintain the action
Macias v. Macias
The landlord initiated a summary holdover proceeding to evict the former spouse, categorized as a tenant at will or sufferance, after their divorce. The tenant sought dismissal, asserting lack of subject matter jurisdiction and a defective predicate notice. The court denied the dismissal motion, affirming its jurisdiction over tenancies at will or sufferance under RPAPL § 711(1) and RPL § 228, clarifying that the spousal support obligation did not preclude jurisdiction. Although the court granted the tenant leave to file a late answer, it proceeded to a summary determination, concluding that no triable issues of fact existed since the tenant had previously agreed to vacate the premises as part of their divorce settlement. Consequently, a judgment of possession was awarded to the landlord, with execution of the warrant stayed for several months