In a case from the Rochester City Court, the court awarded $770 in damages to the landlord, consisting of a cost of $400 to prime and paint the apartment; $54 for cleaning; $100 to repair holes in the living room wall; $108 for garbage removal; and $108 to exterminate fleas. (Chili Venture LLC v Stahl, 54 Misc 3d 461 [Rochester City Ct 2016].) The court observed that the costs proved by the landlord were for damages beyond ordinary wear and tear; as the court stated, the landlord's "documents demonstrate that [the tenant's] apartment 'was a disaster' after she was evicted. Although the priming and painting charges appear to be excessive, additional work was necessary 'due to nicotine.' " (Id. at 468.)[FN7]
Although the court in Hamilton denied recovery to the landlord for items such as garbage under a stove, stains in the{**60 Misc 3d at 846} sink and tub, food and garbage in the refrigerator and porch, [*6]and dog hair throughout the apartment, finding that those items were ordinary wear and tear, the court did find that physical damage (such as damage caused by the tenant's dog scratching and chewing several areas of moulding, as well as alterations to an electrical outlet) exceeded ordinary wear and tear. (Hamilton at 389.) However, because the landlord "failed to produce sufficient proof reflecting the reasonable cost of repairs in the form of paid receipts or two itemized estimates" as required by UCCA 1804, the court would have "to speculate as to the amount of the damages—no award can be made based on speculation." (Hamilton at 389.)