Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
WASSFAM, LLC, MW 100-104 West 17th Street, LLC and JGCB, LLC, Petitioners-Landlord-Appellants, v. Ike UDE, Respondent-Tenant-Respondent, “John Doe” and/or “Jane Doe”, Respondents-Respondents.
Order (David B. Cohen, J.), entered July 25, 2008, reversed, with $10 costs, and landlord's motion for summary judgment of possession is granted. Execution of the warrant of eviction shall be stayed for 30 days from service of a copy of this order, with notice of entry.
Petitioner-landlord demonstrated its prima facie entitlement to summary judgment on the holdover petition, by establishing that the building premises was subject to stabilization coverage solely as a result of the predecessor owner's participation in the former J-51 tax abatement program (see Administrative Code of City of New York § 11-243) and that respondent Ude's tenancy began several years after the J-51 tax abatement expired (see Ogando v. Pamela Equities Corp., 44 A.D.3d 367 [2007]; 155 Wooster, LLC v. Dalrymple, 21 Misc.3d 138[A], 2008 N.Y. Slip Op 52306[U] [2008]. In opposition, respondent failed to raise a triable issue. That the predecessor owner conditionally agreed to provide respondent with a rent stabilized lease in settling a prior eviction proceeding brought in 2003 against the (then) record tenant did not serve to confer full stabilization protection upon respondent (see 546 W. 156th St. HDFC v. Smalls, 43 A.D.3d 7 [2007]; cf. Matter of Carrano v. Castro, 44 A.D.3d 1038 [2007] ), at least in these circumstances, where the record before us contains no indication that respondent complied with the nonmonetary condition specified in the settlement stipulation and shows that the stipulating parties consistently treated respondent's tenancy as unregulated by entering into a series of unregulated lease and renewal agreements.
PER CURIAM.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 570580 /08.
Decided: December 29, 2009
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)