Court Denies Landlord's Claims Against Tenant's Attorney

LVT Number: 12346

Facts: Landlord sued to evict tenant for nonpayment of rent several times during a two-year period. Tenant was represented by an attorney and landlord wasn't. After a number of delays, the court ruled for landlord. Tenant also eventually moved out of the apartment. Landlord then sued former tenant and tenant's attorney for malicious prosecution, abuse of process, and intentional interference with landlord's economic advantage.

Facts: Landlord sued to evict tenant for nonpayment of rent several times during a two-year period. Tenant was represented by an attorney and landlord wasn't. After a number of delays, the court ruled for landlord. Tenant also eventually moved out of the apartment. Landlord then sued former tenant and tenant's attorney for malicious prosecution, abuse of process, and intentional interference with landlord's economic advantage. Landlord claimed that a) tenant and his attorney had started a meritless illegal lockout case against landlord, b) they had unjustifiably and unreasonably delayed one of the nonpayment cases for over a year, c) tenant's attorney advised tenant to withhold rent during the prior cases, and d) tenant's attorney demanded a settlement payment and threatened prolonged litigation if landlord didn't comply with his demands. Court: Landlord loses. Tenant's attorney may have been overzealous, but landlord's claims were meritless. As a matter of law, landlord couldn't claim malicious prosecution of tenant's illegal lockout claim because that case didn't end in landlord's favor. Although landlord now showed that tenant had started that action without cause, the court ruled for tenant, finding that landlord had unlawfully and forcibly evicted tenant. Landlord couldn't claim abuse of process because tenant's attorney didn't send legal papers to landlord for any unlawful purpose. And landlord couldn't claim intentional interference with economic advantage by tenant's attorney. Even if the attorney's advice to tenant to withhold rent was wrong, landlord didn't show fraud, collusion, malice, or bad faith. Tenant's attorney had advised tenant not to pay rent based on tenant's claim for damages based on a breach of the warranty of habitability and the illegal lockout.

Tsafatinos v. Ward: NYLJ, p. 32, col. 3 (5/6/98) (Civ. Ct. NY; Acosta, J)