Court Can't Force SRO Tenant to Relocate Temporarily While Landlord Renovates

Landlord sued tenant, seeking a court order directing tenant to sign a temporary relocation agreement. Landlord bought the building intending to rehabilitate it and convert it to affordable and supportive housing. The building contained 84 SRO units and tenant was one of eight tenants remaining in the building. After starting the case, landlord asked the court to issue a temporary and preliminary injunction directing tenant to sign a temporary relocation agreement. Landlord claimed that it needed tenant's apartment to secure funding as part of the rehabilitation process. Landlord's goal was to renovate one side of the building at a time so that tenant would temporarily live in another SRO unit while her apartment was renovated. She would then be moved back into her renovated unit. Landlord also asked the court to consolidate a pending HP action brought by tenant with this case.

Tenant opposed landlord's request for the injunctions. She didn't want to relocate, claiming that her apartment would be significantly smaller after landlord installed a bathroom, that she would lose a window, and that she would have to share kitchen space with 12 rather than four other tenants.

The court ruled against landlord. The purpose of a preliminary injunction is to maintain the status quo between the parties, not to determine their ultimate rights. And a preliminary injunction shouldn't be granted, absent extraordinary circumstances, where the status quo would be disturbed and landlord would get the ultimate relief sought. Landlord also showed no statute or binding case law supporting its position that the court could force tenant to sign a relocation agreement. The court also denied landlord's request to combine tenant's HP proceeding with this case, finding no reason to do so. 

235 W. 107th St., LLC v. Martinez: Index No. 150984/2023, 2023 NY Slip Op 30552(U)(Sup. Ct. NY; 2/23/23; Bluth, J)