Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Port Chester Housing Authority v. Mobley, 6 Misc. 3d 32 (2004)

Citation
Port Chester Housing Authority v. Mobley, 6 Misc. 3d 32 (2004)
Parent Document
Port Chester Housing Authority v. Mobley, 6 Misc. 3d 32 (2004)
Jurisdiction
New York (state)
Effective Date
2004-10-28

Full Text

1,394 chars
Every lease for residential purposes is deemed to contain an implied warranty of habitability to the effect that the premises are fit for human habitation, that the premises are fit for the use reasonably intended by the parties and that the occupants will not be subject to conditions that are dangerous, hazardous or detrimental to life, health or safety (Real Property Law § 235-b [1]). The warranty was not intended to make the landlord a guarantor of every amenity customarily rendered in the landlord-tenant relationship, but only to provide protection against those conditions that materially affect the health and safety of the tenants or those deficiencies that in the eyes of a reasonable person deprive tenant of those essential functions which a residence is expected to provide (Park W. Mgt. Corp. v Mitchell, 47 NY2d 316, 327-328 [1979], cert denied 444 US 992 [1979]). In the case at bar, the court below properly determined that the failure to provide a roll-in shower did not constitute a breach of the warranty of habitability. However, in our opinion, tenant is entitled to an additional abatement of $800 due to petitioner’s failure to correct the insect and rodent infestation (cf. Smithline v Monica, 1987 WL 14296 [Watertown City Ct, Jefferson County, May 5, 1987]; Pleasant E. Assoc, v Cabrera, 125 Misc 2d 877 [1984]). McCabe, P.J., Rudolph and Angiolillo, JJ., concur.