Use of Roof Terrace Is Term of Lease, Not Revocable License

Rent-stabilized tenant sued landlord and asked the court to declare that access to an adjoining roof terrace was required by her lease. Landlord claimed that tenant had only a revocable license to use the roof and that there was no actual terrace. The court ruled for tenant. Tenant's initial, 1982 lease stated that the lease was for apartment 9B "and terrace, if any." The lease also stated that use of the roof terrace was subject to landlord's approval. Tenant and another top-floor tenant used the roof with no objection from landlord. In 1989, landlord rented tenant the second top-floor apartment, 9A, and allowed tenant to combine the two apartments. Tenant's new lease again stated that the lease was for the apartment "and terrace, if any." The new lease said nothing about use of the roof terrace being subject to landlord's approval. The lease also stated that no one was allowed on the roof, but landlord permitted tenant to use the roof. Tenant used the roof frequently and kept light furniture on it. Landlord had access to the roof for repairs and inspection. Tenant's personal use of the roof was intended to be in connection with her tenancy of the combined apartments. It wasn't a revocable license.

Garza v. 508 West 112th Street, Inc.: NYLJ, 12/30/08, p. 26, col. 1 (Sup. Ct. NY; Gische, J)