Accepting Use and Occupancy Doesn't Reestablish Tenancy

March 1, 2001

LVT Number: 14826

Landlord sued to evict tenant. The court ruled for landlord. Tenant appealed, claiming that landlord accepted rent from him for the months of April and May 2000 and that this reestablished his tenancy. The court ruled against tenant, and tenant appealed. The appeals court interpreted a judgment in a prior nonpayment case as covering rent through March 2000. The court in the nonpayment case didn't rule that the tenancy was still in effect in May. Landlord terminated the tenancy as of April 13.

Landlord sued to evict tenant. The court ruled for landlord. Tenant appealed, claiming that landlord accepted rent from him for the months of April and May 2000 and that this reestablished his tenancy. The court ruled against tenant, and tenant appealed. The appeals court interpreted a judgment in a prior nonpayment case as covering rent through March 2000. The court in the nonpayment case didn't rule that the tenancy was still in effect in May. Landlord terminated the tenancy as of April 13. Acceptance of money from tenant for April and May, after landlord started the holdover case, didn't waive the termination. What landlord accepted was merely use and occupancy.

50 King St. Co. v. Alexi: NYLJ, 2/28/01, p. 18, col. 3 (App. T.1 Dept.; McCooe, JP, Gangel-Jacob, Suarez, JJ)

Topics

More like this