owner, issued a termination notice and commenced a holdover proceeding just a few
months after ERAP payments were received and accepted. The obligation not to evict for
an expired lease is a term that is binding upon acceptance of the ERAP payment.
Regardless of the intent of the Legislature, the language in the governing statute is clear.
The issuance of a termination notice or the filing of a holdover based upon a lease
expiration are acts designed to cause an eviction. The act of initiating an eviction within
the 12-month period, effectively undermines the plain reading of the statute and the
obligation not to evict.
The termination notice is dated February 19, 2022. The termination notice was used
as the basis to file an eviction case in June 2022. The case appeared on the court's
calendar in August 2022. The termination notice and the filing of the eviction case were
acts done within the 12-month period after petitioner accepted ERAP payments. The
pursue of an eviction case during the window period, 12-months after the acceptance of
ERAP funds, is not permitted. Nor can the adjournment of a case relieve the property
owner from the obligation not to evict, and not adhere to the 12-month period. The
eviction case cannot be started during the window period, and to do so and then hope
that it remains dormant in the court's calendar does not validate a termination notice that
should not have been issued pursuant to the obligations created by the acceptance of
ERAP funds. The passage of time cannot work to correct a defective or improper
predicate notice.
The predicate notice issued during the 12-month period after petitioner accepted
ERAP funds, and as such the predicate notice is defective. The notice seeks to terminate