No Link Found Between Tenant Alterations and Leak

Landlord sued to evict rent-stabilized tenant for permitting a nuisance within his apartment. Landlord claimed that tenant made unauthorized alterations, which caused a flood and damaged both the apartment and other areas of the building. Landlord had previously sued tenant on similar grounds in 2013. That case was dismissed on procedural grounds. Landlord claimed that it wasn't required to serve a notice to cure due to the seriousness of the nuisance claim. Tenant asked the court to dismiss the case. Tenant claimed that the alterations were made with prior landlord's consent. Tenant also claimed that landlord's wife caused the flood when she drilled a screw into the wall and pierced a pipe. The court ruled for tenant and dismissed the case. The case wasn't barred by the decision in the prior case because there was no ruling on the merits. But the alteration work that landlord complained about took place in 1996. Landlord showed no connection between that work and a leak that took place in 2012. So there was no ongoing condition that could be grounds for a nuisance claim.

Magal Properties LLC v. Gritsyk: Index No. L&T 88908/13, NYLJ No. 1202675797880 (Civ. Ct. NY; 11/7/14; Gonzales, J)