Case Type

Non-payment

Court

Civil Court of the City of New York

County

New York (Manhattan)

L&T / Index / Case / Docket / Clerk's Number

LT-050296-20/NY

Petitioner

215 Dorchester Partners, LLC

Respondent

Triplay, Inc.

Judge

Tsai, Richard

Decision/Order Date

2020-09-04

Posture

Pre-answer Motion by Tenant

Disposition

Motion Granted for Landlord

Winner

Landlord Substantially Won

Synopsis

In this non-payment proceeding, the tenant moved to dismiss the petition filed by the landlord, arguing that the petition failed to allege compliance with Real Property Law § 235-e(d). The tenant contended that the law applies to commercial tenancies, while the landlord argued otherwise, citing precedent and legislative intent. The court sided with the landlord, emphasizing that the statute pertains to residential premises and does not specifically reference commercial premises. The court also noted that prior to the 2019 amendments, the statute clearly applied to residential tenancies. Therefore, the court denied the tenant's motion to dismiss. The court ordered the tenant to answer the petition within 10 days. Key Legal Points: The court clarified that Real Property Law § 235-e(d) applies to residential premises and does not extend to commercial tenancies. Compliance with the statute need not be pleaded in the petition, and serving the required notice out of caution does not constitute an admission of the law's applicability to commercial tenancies.

Download

Takedown Policy

Share

COinS