Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Tirse v. Andrews, 128 A.D.3d 1112 (2015)

Citation
Tirse v. Andrews, 128 A.D.3d 1112 (2015)
Parent Document
Tirse v. Andrews, 128 A.D.3d 1112 (2015)
Jurisdiction
New York (state)
Effective Date
2015-05-07

Full Text

770 chars
Supreme Court was on firmer footing in dismissing plaintiffs claims for retaliatory eviction and fraud. Retaliatory eviction is a statutory cause of action limited to “rental residential premises” and, accordingly, has no applicability to the alleged commercial lease here (Real Property Law § 223-b [6]; see e.g. Matter of Lazy Acres Park, LLC v Ferretti, 118 AD3d 1406, 1407 [2014], lv dismissed 25 NY3d 965 [2015]). The fraud claim was also properly dismissed, as such a cause of action “does not arise where the only fraud alleged merely relates to a party’s alleged intent to breach a contractual obligation” (767 Third Ave. LLC v Greble & Finger, LLP, 8 AD3d 75, 76 [2004]; see Roklina v Skidmore Coll., 268 AD2d 765, 766-767 [2000], lv denied 95 NY2d 758 [2000]).