Pershad v. Parkchester South Condominium, 174 Misc. 2d 92 (1997)
- Citation
- Pershad v. Parkchester South Condominium, 174 Misc. 2d 92 (1997)
- Parent Document
- Pershad v. Parkchester South Condominium, 174 Misc. 2d 92 (1997)
- Jurisdiction
- New York (state)
- Effective Date
- 1997-08-15
Other Sections in This Document (14)
- Pershad v. Parkchester South Condominium, 174 Misc. 2d 92 (1997)
- Pershad v. Parkchester South Condominium, 174 Misc. 2d 92 (1997)
- Pershad v. Parkchester South Condominium, 174 Misc. 2d 92 (1997)
- Pershad v. Parkchester South Condominium, 174 Misc. 2d 92 (1997)
- Pershad v. Parkchester South Condominium, 174 Misc. 2d 92 (1997)
- Pershad v. Parkchester South Condominium, 174 Misc. 2d 92 (1997)
- Pershad v. Parkchester South Condominium, 174 Misc. 2d 92 (1997)
- Pershad v. Parkchester South Condominium, 174 Misc. 2d 92 (1997)
- Pershad v. Parkchester South Condominium, 174 Misc. 2d 92 (1997)
- Pershad v. Parkchester South Condominium, 174 Misc. 2d 92 (1997)
- Pershad v. Parkchester South Condominium, 174 Misc. 2d 92 (1997)
- Pershad v. Parkchester South Condominium, 174 Misc. 2d 92 (1997)
- Pershad v. Parkchester South Condominium, 174 Misc. 2d 92 (1997)
- Pershad v. Parkchester South Condominium, 174 Misc. 2d 92 (1997)
Full Text
1,035 charsRespondents’ argument for dismissal of this proceeding is predicated on the undisputed fact that petitioner is a fee owner of the condominium unit, and thus, his form of redress should be sought in a different forum. Respondents further contend and it is undisputed that since there is no landlord and tenant relationship between the parties, petitioner is precluded from seeking relief in the Housing Part. Respondents assert that the Housing Part is restricted to the resolution of disputes between a landlord and tenant and not a condominium unit owner. While there is a degree of truth in respondents’ argument that the Housing Part is indeed the proper forum to resolve disputes between a landlord and tenant, respondents fail to cite any specific law or legal precedent which prohibits or precludes petitioner from seeking redress in this forum where the petitioner’s requested relief is one of repairs for leaky pipes and not premised on a claim for breach of warranty of habitability under Real Property Law § 235-b. DISCUSSION