3515 Eastchester Rd., LLC v. Soto, 2025 NY Slip Op 25209 (2025)

Citation: 3515 Eastchester Rd., LLC v. Soto, 2025 NY Slip Op 25209 (2025)
Parent Document: 3515 Eastchester Rd., LLC v. Soto, 2025 NY Slip Op 25209 (2025)
Jurisdiction: New York (state)
Effective Date: 2025-09-16
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10675509/3515-eastchester-rd-llc-v-soto/ ↗

Full Text

1,118 chars

Respondent opposes Petitioner's motion, pointing out that the GCEL's notice provisions under RPL § 231-c took effect August 18, 2024, before the date of the 90-day termination notice on which this proceeding is based, and Petitioner does not address this rule in its motion papers which instead only cite to the body of case law addressing amendment of pleadings. Respondent argues that "predicate notices, unlike pleadings, are not subject to amendment." Affirm of Respondent's Attorney at ¶ 20. Respondent also argues that Petitioner seeks to amend its [*2]pleadings "to incorporate an entirely new basis for the proceeding," id. at ¶ 26, the alleged nuisance behavior is not mentioned in the 90-day termination notice that was served over a year ago, and it would be prejudicial to allow the proposed amendment. While the original RPL § 231-c Notice cites nonrenewal of the lease because of the tenant's alleged violation of a substantial obligation of the tenancy as good cause for eviction, it does not indicate any details of the alleged violation or that the required written 10-day notice to cure was provided.

Other Sections in This Document (50)

Full Text