Notice to Cure Didn't Specify Lease Clause Violated

September 30, 1999

LVT Number: 13592

Landlord sued to evict tenant for illegal subletting. Tenant asked the court to dismiss the case without a trial because landlord's notice to cure and termination notice didn't specify which lease clauses tenant supposedly violated. The court ruled for tenant. Tenant's lease had a clause barring assignment or sublet without landlord's prior written consent. But landlord's notice to cure didn't refer to this lease clause. So landlord hadn't stated sufficient reason to terminate tenant's lease.

Landlord sued to evict tenant for illegal subletting. Tenant asked the court to dismiss the case without a trial because landlord's notice to cure and termination notice didn't specify which lease clauses tenant supposedly violated. The court ruled for tenant. Tenant's lease had a clause barring assignment or sublet without landlord's prior written consent. But landlord's notice to cure didn't refer to this lease clause. So landlord hadn't stated sufficient reason to terminate tenant's lease.

Stanford Leasing Corp. v. Stewart: NYLJ, p. 32, col. 2 (9/22/99) (Civ. Ct. Kings; Wendt, J)

Topics

More like this