38 Misc. 3d 35
N.Y. App. Term.2012Background
- Holdover proceeding commenced October 2010 based on a clutter condition in the apartment.
- Petition alleges apartment is decontrolled but fails to allege the building receives a project-based Section 8 subsidy.
- Parties entered into a stipulation: tenant must move by July 31, 2011 unless the July 12, 2011 inspection passed, in which case tenant could remain until August 31, 2011.
- Tenant moved to vacate the stipulation and final judgment, asserting inspection passed and seeking FHAA accommodation.
- City Court denied tenant’s motion; the appellate court reverses, vacating the stipulation and judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| RPAPL 741 adequacy of petition | Tenant | Landlord | Petition must state regulatory status; failure prejudicial to tenant |
| Prejudice from missing regulatory allegation | Tenant | Landlord | Stipulation vacated for inadvised entry due to missing regulatory facts |
| FHAA accommodation not decided | Tenant | Landlord | FHAA issues not reached given relief on other ground |
Key Cases Cited
- Volunteers of Am.-Greater N.Y., Inc. v Almonte, 65 AD3d 1155 (2009) (regulatory status may dictate tenant rights under RPAPL)
- Cintron v Pandis, 34 Misc 3d 152[A] (2012) (RPAPL 741 requires stating regulatory status)
- 17th Holding v Rivera, 195 Misc 2d 531 (2002) (defect may be overlooked only if no prejudice)
- Coalition Houses L.P. v Bonano, 12 Misc 3d 146[A] (2006) (prejudice analysis in stipulation contexts)
- Matter of Frutiger, 29 NY2d 143 (1971) (stipulations should be vacated when entered inadvisedly)