Graham Court Owner's Corp. v. Kyle Taylor, 24 N.Y.3d 742 (2015)

Citation: Graham Court Owner's Corp. v. Kyle Taylor, 24 N.Y.3d 742 (2015)
Parent Document: Graham Court Owner's Corp. v. Kyle Taylor, 24 N.Y.3d 742 (2015)
Jurisdiction: New York (state)
Effective Date: 2015-02-19
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2780292/graham-court-owners-corp-v-kyle-taylor/ ↗

Full Text

1,468 chars

New York § 26-516.    The Appellate Division subsequently affirmed
Supreme Court's dismissal of the landlord's CPLR Article 78
challenge to DHCR's determination (Graham Ct. Owners Corp. v
Division of Hous. and Community Renewal, 71 AD3d 515 [1st Dept
2010]).
             Approximately four months after DHCR rendered its
decision in favor of the tenant, and while the landlord's article
78 was pending in Supreme Court, the Landlord commenced the
underlying summary holdover action against the tenant seeking to
evict the tenant and regain possession of the premises, and
demanding rent arrears and $3,000.00 in legal fees.    In support
of its claims, the landlord alleged that the tenant breached the
lease by failing to obtain the required prior written consent to
install a new electrical system in the kitchen -- the same
electric upgrade work disputed by the parties in the matter
before DHCR.    When the tenant failed to cure the breach or
terminate the premises, the landlord commenced the holdover
proceeding.
             For his part, the tenant denied that he breached the
lease, and asserted a defense of retaliatory eviction under Real
Property Law § 223-b seeking all appropriate relief under that
provision.    Tenant also counterclaimed for attorneys' fees and
damages under sections 234 and 233-b.    The landlord responded in
a post trial memorandum that Real Property Law § 234 did not
apply because the statute only recognized a tenant's implied

Other Sections in This Document (34)

Full Text