Absence of C of O Didn't Affect Tenant's Occupancy

June 30, 1999

LVT Number: 13351

Landlord sued to evict tenant for nonpayment of rent. Tenant claimed landlord was barred from collecting rent because the building didn't have a C of O. The court ruled for tenant and dismissed the case without a trial. Landlord appealed and won. Even if one was required for the building, the absence of the C of O didn't necessarily bar landlord's rent claim. DOB records certified that 1938 alteration work converting the building into a multiple dwelling conformed to Building Code requirements.

Landlord sued to evict tenant for nonpayment of rent. Tenant claimed landlord was barred from collecting rent because the building didn't have a C of O. The court ruled for tenant and dismissed the case without a trial. Landlord appealed and won. Even if one was required for the building, the absence of the C of O didn't necessarily bar landlord's rent claim. DOB records certified that 1938 alteration work converting the building into a multiple dwelling conformed to Building Code requirements. So whether the lack of the C of O affected tenant's occupancy was a question of fact requiring a trial.

Crystal Realty Co. v. Ribot: NYLJ, p. 30, col. 2 (6/11/99) (App. T. 1 Dept.; Parness, PJ, Freedman, J)

Topics

More like this