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.
IN RE: PAULSEN REAL ESTATE CORP., Appellant, v. Robert GRAMMICK, Respondent.
In a holdover proceeding to recover possession of certain premises, the petitioner appeals, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Term of the Supreme Court for the Ninth and Tenth Judicial Districts, entered April 12, 1996, which, inter alia, (1) reversed a judgment of the District Court of the County of Nassau, First District (Phelan, J.), entered April 3, 1995, which, after a nonjury trial (Driscoll, J.), granted the petition and awarded it possession of the premises, and (2) dismissed the petition.
ORDERED that the order of the Appellate Term is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the judgment of the District Court is reinstated.
The respondent Robert Grammick occupies an apartment in a building owned by the petitioner pursuant to a written lease which prohibits pets. The lease also contains a nonwaiver clause which specifically provides that the petitioner's acceptance of rent with knowledge of any violation of the lease does not constitute a waiver of such violation, and that a violation can be waived only by written agreement.
The petitioner commenced this holdover proceeding when Grammick failed to cure his violation of the no-pet clause. After trial, the District Court awarded possession of the premises to the petitioner. The Appellate Term reversed, concluding that the petitioner had waived the violation by accepting rent with knowledge that Grammick owned a dog. We reverse.
While under certain circumstances a waiver may be inferred from the acceptance of rent, the Appellate Term erred in finding a waiver in this case where the parties had expressly agreed otherwise (see, Jefpaul Garage Corp. v. Presbyterian Hosp., 61 N.Y.2d 442, 446, 474 N.Y.S.2d 458, 462 N.E.2d 1176; Pollack v. Green Constr. Corp., 40 A.D.2d 996, 997, 338 N.Y.S.2d 486, affd. 32 N.Y.2d 720, 344 N.Y.S.2d 363, 297 N.E.2d 99; Luna Park Housing Corp. v. Besser, 38 A.D.2d 713, 714, 329 N.Y.S.2d 332).
Grammick's remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review (see, Green Point Sav. Bank v. Oppenheim, 217 A.D.2d 571, 572, 628 N.Y.S.2d 595).
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
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.
Decided: November 03, 1997
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
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)