sublessor provided that the security deposit will be returned to
plaintiffs ‘‘30 days after the Fixed Expiration date and after
delivery by Tenant of the entire Demised Premises to Landlord
in the condition required by this Sub-Lease.’’ We note that the
time stipulated in the sublease for the return of the security
deposit has not yet arrived.
40 60 MISCELLANEOUS REPORTS, 3d SERIES
Plaintiffs argue that, pursuant to General Obligations Law
§ 7-105, defendant is liable for the return of the security de-
posit. This argument is unavailing. Section 7-105 provides gen-
erally that when a landlord transfers the ownership of a prop-
erty, it must also transfer the tenant’s security deposit to the
new owner and notify the tenant, and courts have held that
this provides a successor landlord with a private right of action
against the prior landlord (see Gerel Corp. v Prime Eastside
Holdings, LLC, 12 AD3d 86 [2004]; Perez v Ruggiero, 35 Misc
3d 126[A], 2012 NY Slip Op 50567[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d,
11th & 13th Jud Dists 2012]). However, nothing in section
7-105 would appear to change the rule that a tenant has no
cause of action against a former landlord for the return of a se-
curity deposit prior to the time stipulated for the security de-
posit’s return. Consequently, plaintiffs’ motion was properly
denied and the branch of defendant’s cross motion seeking to
dismiss the complaint was properly granted.
Accordingly, the order, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed.
MARANO, P.J., GARGUILO and BRANDS, JJ., concur.