OWL CREEK PROPERTIES, LLC. v. TIMMONS

Abstract

In this holdover-non-primary residence case, the court determined that the tenant\u27s brother, who resided in the premises since 2015, established succession rights despite the tenant\u27s permanent vacatur. The court applied recent legislative amendments to define permanent vacatur and credited brother\u27s testimony despite a lack of documentation. His continuous occupancy and credible testimony prevailed over the landlord\u27s claims, resulting in the case being dismissed in favor of the tenant. The court held that the new statutory definition of permanent vacatur provided in RSC § 2523.5(b)(2) applies, and notes that this provision overrules the prior rule on determining permanent vacatur in the First Department, stated in Third Lenox Terrace Assoc. v. Edwards, 91 AD3d 532 (1st Dept 2012), which no longer applies