| City of New York Municipal Court | Aug 14, 1946
The question in this proceeding is whether or not there is sufficient evidence to the effect that the tenant committed or permitted a nuisance within the meaning of paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) of section 6 of the Bent Regulation for Housing (10 Federal Register 3436, 3441). That section permits the eviction of a tenant if he is committing or permitting a nuisance.
The section did not extend rights conferred upon landlords, but limited such rights (see Spire v. Doctor, 183 Misc. 853" date_filed="1944-08-10" court="None" case_name="Spire v. Doctor">183 Misc. 853), and therefore whether or not there would be sufficient evidence to establish a nuisance is governed by local law.
I am satisfied that one act of disorderly conduct on the part of the tenants, even though there be a conviction for the same, does not constitute a nuisance. I think that the evidence offered falls far short of the requirements which must be met to constitute a nuisance. There is no evidence of any objectionable conduct upon the part of the tenant since the conviction; and I, therefore, dismiss the petition without prejudice to a renewal should the landlord deem it advisable upon proof of other acts or disorderliness since the conviction. (See Hixson v. Leonard, 186 Misc. 379" date_filed="1945-11-17" court="None" case_name="Hixson v. Leonard">186 Misc. 379.)