Landlord's Owner Occupancy Case Dismissed Based on HSTPA

Landlord sued to evict rent-stabilized tenant in 2018, in order to recover the apartment for use by his son as a primary residence. After the rent stabilization law was amended by the Housing Stability and Tenant Protection Act of 2019 (HSTPA), tenant asked the court for permission to amend his answer in opposition to landlord's claim. He also asked the court to dismiss the case.

The court ruled for tenant. As amended, the rent stabilization law provision concerning owner occupancy cases required landlord to show compelling necessity rather than a good faith intent to occupy the apartment. The amended law also limited landlord from obtaining more than one apartment in a building for owner occupancy purposes. Any prejudice to landlord caused by delay in amending tenant's answer was outweighed by the court's obligation to follow the new changes to the law. So tenant was permitted to amend his answer. In addition, landlord already had recovered one apartment in the building for owner occupancy purposes. Landlord argued that the other tenant wasn't evicted but moved to another apartment in the building. But the court pointed out that this was the result of an eviction proceeding against that tenant based on owner occupancy and landlord had to offer that tenant another apartment because he was disabled. Since landlord already had recovered one apartment in the building for owner occupancy, HSTPA required dismissal of the case.

Sassouni v. Adams: 65 Misc.3d 1231(A), 2019 NY Slip Op 51933(U) (Civ. Ct. NY; 12/6/19; Ortiz, J)