Case Type
Holdover-Licensee
Housing Type
Condominium
Court
Civil Court of the City of New York
County
New York County (Manhattan)
L&T / Index / Case / Docket / Clerk's Number
L&T 306310/24
Slip Opinion Number
2025 NY Slip Op 31610(U)
Petitioner
Paritosh Gupta
Respondent
Steven Ostad, Hershy Dembitzer, Jacqueline Mueller, “John Doeâ€, “Jane Doeâ€
Judge
Guthrie, Clinton J.
Decision/Order Date
2025-05-01
Posture
Post-answer Motion by Tenant
Disposition
Other
Winner
Tenant Substantially Won
Synopsis
A tenant moved to dismiss a holdover licensee proceeding under CPLR § 3211(a)(4), arguing that a related Supreme Court action involving the same parties and premises warranted dismissal. The tenant claimed the two proceedings were duplicative. The landlord cross-moved for use and occupancy. The court denied the tenant’s motion, finding the Civil Court and Supreme Court actions were not substantially similar, as the latter sought injunctive and monetary relief not available in Civil Court and did not include a counterclaim for possession. The landlord’s cross-motion for accrued and pendente lite use and occupancy was also denied because RPAPL § 745 no longer permits accrued U&O post-HSTPA, and procedural prerequisites for pendente lite U&O were unmet. Practice Note: Possession claims and damages for illegal eviction are jurisdictionally and substantively distinct; plead both in the proper forum and be aware of post-HSTPA limitations on U&O claims.
Recommended Citation
"Gupta v. Ostad" (2025). All Decisions. 1784.
https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/housing_court_all/1784
