Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Graham Court Owners Corp. v. Powell, 196 Misc. 2d 825 (2003)

Citation
Graham Court Owners Corp. v. Powell, 196 Misc. 2d 825 (2003)
Parent Document
Graham Court Owners Corp. v. Powell, 196 Misc. 2d 825 (2003)
Jurisdiction
New York (state)
Effective Date
2003-07-03

Full Text

720 chars
Respondent argues that these claims are appropriate because they are inextricably intertwined with petitioner’s case. A counterclaim which is not related to or provides a defense to the petitioner’s claim for rent should be severed from a summary proceeding. (Coronet Props. v Lederer, NYLJ, Feb. 21, 1987, at 12, col 2 [App Term, 1st Dept]; Hymowitz v Narkiewicz, NYLJ, May 13, 1983, at 6, col 2 [App Term, 1st Dept].) However, counterclaims which are inextricably intertwined with the landlord’s claim for rent are appropriate in a summary proceeding. (Amdar Co. v Hahalis, 145 Misc 2d 987 [App Term, 1st Dept 1990].) In this proceeding, both counterclaims are inextricably intertwined with petitioner’s claims herein.