summary proceedings being commenced pursuant to 9 NYCRR Sections 2504.4(d) and
2508.1(a).
The Verified Answer with Counterclaims, dated February 21, 2019, denies the allegations of
the Petition except admits that: 1) Petitioner rented the apartment to Respondent for residential
purposes and she remains in possession; 2) Sinclair accepted Respondent's rental payments for
October and November 2018; and, 3) the premises is rent stabilized and subject to the
ETPA.
The Verified Answer contains 18 affirmative defenses.
(1) Failure to state cause of action;
(2) Lack of personal jurisdiction due to improper service of the Termination Notice, dated
July 30, 2018;
(3) Improper service of the second Termination Notice dated November 7, 2018;
(4) Improper service of the Notice of Petition and Petition because the process server
allegedly attempted service as follows:
"29. According to the Affidavit of Service, one attempt at personal service was
purportedly made on Saturday, January 19, 2019 at 10:07 a.m. An attempt at personal service
was purportedly made on Tuesday, January 22, 2019 at 7:49 a.m. Then, an attempt at personal
service was purportedly made on Thursday, January 24, 2019 at 6:51
p.m."
(5) The Fifth Affirmative Defense alleges that the July 2018 Notice
is defective because the Notice fails to provide enough particularity to the allegations of
nonprimary residence claim.
(6) The Sixth Affirmative Defense states that the July 30, 2018 Notice is defective because it
is alleged in the Notice that it was sent at least 90 days, but not more than 150 days from the date
of service of the July 30, 2018 Notice on which the Respondent's term expires. [*4]The Respondent states that this time period is patently defective