Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Notre Dame Leasing, LLC v. Rosario, 2 N.Y. 459 (2004)

Citation
Notre Dame Leasing, LLC v. Rosario, 2 N.Y. 459 (2004)
Parent Document
Notre Dame Leasing, LLC v. Rosario, 2 N.Y. 459 (2004)
Jurisdiction
New York (state)
Effective Date
2004-05-11

Other Sections in This Document (40)

Full Text

1,357 chars
Further support for the position that a tenant does not have to await action by a public welfare official to invoke the Spiegel Law defense can be found in Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law § 745. This relatively recent 1997 enactment—part of the Rent Regulation Reform Act of 1997 (L 1997, ch 116, § 36)— requires a tenant in a summary proceeding wherein an adjournment is requested by the tenant to deposit a sum with the court *471sufficient to cover the amount of rent or use and occupancy from the date of the commencement of the action unless, among other things, the tenant can demonstrate that he or she has properly interposed a Spiegel Law defense (see RPAPL 745 [2] [a] [iii]). The provision does not differentiate between sums paid by the tenant and sums paid by a public welfare agency. It makes clear only that the tenant is not required to deposit any portion of the rent. Certainly if the intent was otherwise, the Legislature could have said so. Neither does the availability of other remedies such as Real Property Law § 235-b—the warranty of habitability statute—or Multiple Dwelling Law § 302-a—which defines a rent impairing violation—lead to the conclusion that the Legislature intended a requirement of prior withholding of rent by a public welfare agency as a precondition to a tenant’s invocation of the Spiegel Law defense.