with the defendant 26 Seventh Avenue South, LLC (hereinafter the landlord), for a
rent-stabilized apartment in Manhattan, and paid the landlord a security deposit in the
sum of $6,300. The lease provided that the security deposit would be returned to the
tenant within "60 days after" the lease was terminated as long as the tenant did not breach
the lease. After the lease terminated, the tenant requested the return of his security
deposit. When the landlord failed to return it, the tenant commenced this action alleging
that the landlord breached the lease. In its answer, the landlord asserted counterclaims
alleging that the tenant had breached the lease by vacating the apartment after the
expiration of the lease and had damaged the apartment, necessitating repairs in the sum
of $12,000. The Supreme Court properly denied those branches of the tenant's motion
which were for summary judgment on the first and second causes of action, which were
to recover damages for rent overcharges for the security deposit, and advance payment of
rent, respectively. The tenant failed to establish, prima facie, that there had been a rent
overcharge (see Johnson v S.W.
Mgt., LLC, 114 AD3d 590 [2014]).
[*2]
However, the Supreme Court should have granted that branch of the tenant's
motion which was for summary judgment on the third cause of action. The tenant
established his prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on the cause of
action alleging breach of the lease for failing to return the security deposit (see
General Obligations Law § 7-103). The evidence established that the tenant
paid the landlord a security deposit and vacated the apartment a few days before the lease
terminated. In opposition, the landlord failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Contrary to