2016 NY Slip Op 26428
Nassau County District Court2016Background
- Respondent Sharon Searchwell worked as a live‑in home aide for decedent Esther P. Stincone and resided at 95 Joan Court while employed.
- Stincone later entered a nursing home and died; Searchwell continued living at the premises after employment ended.
- Petitioners initiated a holdover proceeding seeking to evict Searchwell, alleging she was a tenant who received a 30‑day written termination notice dated to end August 31, 2016.
- Searchwell denied tenant status, asserting she was a licensee whose occupancy was incident to employment and therefore not entitled to tenant notice protections.
- Petitioners argued Searchwell was effectively a tenant‑at‑will because she had unfettered possession and had asserted tenancy in prior small‑claims litigation.
- The court considered statutory authority (RPAPL § 713(11)) and precedent on occupancy incidental to employment to decide whether notice was required.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Searchwell is a tenant or licensee | Petitioners: Searchwell occupied with unfettered possession and should be treated as a tenant‑at‑will | Searchwell: Occupancy was incidental to employment as a live‑in aide; she never paid rent | Court: Searchwell is a licensee; occupancy was incident to employment |
| Whether a notice to quit was required before commencing holdover | Petitioners: Served 30‑day notice terminating tenancy | Searchwell: If a licensee, different notice rule applies (10‑day), or no notice if employment ended | Court: Under RPAPL § 713(11) no notice is required when possession was incident to employment and employment terminated |
| Whether petitioners may maintain holdover despite characterizing occupant as tenant | Petitioners: Proceeding based on tenant termination | Searchwell: Characterization as tenant is incorrect and affects procedure | Court: Petitioners may proceed; mischaracterization is harmless because employment termination suffices to end occupancy |
| Proper remedy/procedure for termination of occupancy incident to employment | Petitioners: Follow landlord‑tenant notice rules | Searchwell: Termination follows employment end, not landlord‑tenant rules | Court: Use RPAPL § 713(11); no pre‑eviction notice required when occupancy was tied to employment |
Key Cases Cited
- Genc Realty LLC v. Nezaj, 52 A.D.3d 415 (App. Div. 2008) (occupancy incidental to employment does not create landlord‑tenant relationship)