Nonrenewal Notice Not Sent on Time

LVT Number: 17869

(Decision submitted by David Hershey-Webb of the Manhattan law firm of Himmelstein, McConnell, Gribben, Donoghue & Joseph, attorneys for the tenant.) Landlord sued to evict rent-stabilized tenant to recover apartment for owner occupancy. Landlord claimed that he needed the apartment for his daughter, who was moving to New York to attend law school. Tenant asked the court to dismiss the case. He claimed that landlord's nonrenewal notice wasn't sent on time. The court ruled for tenant. Landlord mailed his nonrenewal notice on April 28, 2003, terminating the tenancy as of July 30, 2003.

(Decision submitted by David Hershey-Webb of the Manhattan law firm of Himmelstein, McConnell, Gribben, Donoghue & Joseph, attorneys for the tenant.) Landlord sued to evict rent-stabilized tenant to recover apartment for owner occupancy. Landlord claimed that he needed the apartment for his daughter, who was moving to New York to attend law school. Tenant asked the court to dismiss the case. He claimed that landlord's nonrenewal notice wasn't sent on time. The court ruled for tenant. Landlord mailed his nonrenewal notice on April 28, 2003, terminating the tenancy as of July 30, 2003. Landlord argued that the notice was mailed at least 90 days before the lease end date. Tenant pointed out that a recent Court of Appeals case required an additional five days for mailing of a 10-day notice to cure. The Court of Appeals has ruled that adding five days to a notice period is required. It didn't matter whether it was a notice to cure or a nonrenewal notice.

Shoshany v. Goldstein: NYLJ, 2/9/05, p. 18, Col. 3 (Civ. Ct. NY, Capella, J)