Assuming arguendo, that the Landlord did not include its address in the Notice of
Petition, this Court is aware of only two (2) Appellate Term cases that have dealt with the same
issue pursuant to section 401(b) of the New York City Civil Court Act and in both of those cases
the Appellate Term determined that the omission of plaintiff's address was a mere irregularity
which did not divest the court of its jurisdiction (Malik v. Cukrowski, 172 Misc 2d 360,
659 NYS2d 176 (Civ. Ct. Queens County 1997) and Hober v. Reikert, 97 Misc 2d 637,
162 NYS2d 328 (App. Term, 1st Dept. 1997).
BREACH OF WARRANT OF HABITABILITY
It is well settled that a residential tenant may recover damages the tenant
incurs as a result of the landlord's breach of warrant of habitability. (See, Suarez v.
Rivercross Tenant's Corp., 107 Misc 2d 135, 438 NYS2d 164 (App. Term 1st Dept. 1981)).
Notwithstanding the foregoing, there is no litmus test in determining the measure of
damages the tenant has sustained, assuming a breach, or in determining whether the warranty of
habitability has in fact been breached. As stated in 2 Dolan, Rasch's Landlord and Tenant
Summary Proceedings §18:7, at 36 [4th ed.]. "Each case must turn on its own peculiar
facts."
While acknowledging it is impossible to attempt to list every instance in which a warranty
may be breached, Rasch's, list, some of the more common instances, such as: air-conditioning
(Whitehouse Estates, Inc. v. Thomson, 87 Misc 2d 813, 386 NYS2d 733 (City Civ. Ct.
1976), heat or hot water complaints (Parkers72nd Associates v. Isaacs, 109 Misc 2d 57,
436 NYS2d 542 (City [*5]Civ. Ct. 1980); Century
Apartments, Inc. v. Yalkowsky, 106 Misc 2d 762, 435 NYS2d 627 (City Civ. Ct. 1980)),