Tenant's Replacement of His Own Appliances Didn't Violate Lease

August 31, 2009

LVT Number: #22119

Landlord sued to evict rent-stabilized tenant for making illegal alterations to his apartment. The court granted tenant's request to dismiss the case. Landlord appealed and lost. Landlord sent tenant a 10-day notice to cure. But three days after sending the cure notice, landlord got a temporary restraining order (TRO) in state Supreme Court to stop tenant from making any alterations to the apartment. So, in effect, tenant was denied a full 10-day cure period since the TRO could be read to mean that all work in the apartment must cease.

Landlord sued to evict rent-stabilized tenant for making illegal alterations to his apartment. The court granted tenant's request to dismiss the case. Landlord appealed and lost. Landlord sent tenant a 10-day notice to cure. But three days after sending the cure notice, landlord got a temporary restraining order (TRO) in state Supreme Court to stop tenant from making any alterations to the apartment. So, in effect, tenant was denied a full 10-day cure period since the TRO could be read to mean that all work in the apartment must cease. The trial court also found that tenant’s replacement of decades-old appliances and cabinets, which she herself had originally purchased with prior landlord’s permission, did not constitute a substantial lease violation.

Nunz Equities East, LLC v. Mangan: NYLJ, 8/26/09, p. 33, col. 1 (App. T. 1 Dept.; McKeon, PJ, Schoenfeld, Heitler, JJ)

Topics

More like this