Case Type
Holdover-Licensee
Housing Type
HDFC
Court
Civil Court of the City of New York
County
Kings County (Brooklyn)
L&T / Index / Case / Docket / Clerk's Number
LT-302558-24/KI
Petitioner
St. Marks Affordable HDFC Phase I
Respondent
John Doe; Jane Doe
Judge
Weisberg, Michael L.
Decision/Order Date
2025-04-23
Posture
Pre-answer Motion by Tenant
Disposition
Case Dismissed/discontinued
Winner
Tenant Substantially Won
Synopsis
In this holdover licensee proceeding, the landlord sued unnamed occupants as John Doe and Jane Doe without first making diligent efforts to identify the actual tenant. In response to the tenant's motion to dismiss, the landlord claimed it had reviewed the file and performed a digital search, but conceded it had not knocked on the apartment door or gathered a physical description. The court held that these minimal efforts failed to meet CPLR 1024's requirements, which demand a good faith attempt to ascertain a party's identity before using a pseudonym. The petition's lack of descriptive identifiers further deprived the respondent of notice. The court granted the motion and dismissed the case. Practice Note: A landlord must demonstrate genuine efforts to identify unknown occupants and provide descriptive allegations when resorting to CPLR 1024; mere file review is insufficient.
Recommended Citation
"St. Marks Affordable HDFC Phase I v. Doe" (2025). All Decisions. 1802.
https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/housing_court_all/1802