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

996 chars

However, to the extent Petitioner seeks to amend not just its Petition but also its RPL § 231-c Notice, which landlords are required to append to both their termination notices and their petitions [FN1]
- CPLR R 3025(b) does not apply; as discussed below, such amendment is not permitted. To begin with, this is a holdover proceeding based on a 90-day notice of termination stating simply that "no current lease is in effect". While Petitioner's termination notice does not cite to any provisions of the Real Property Law, it is evident that it was issued and served on Respondent pursuant to RPL § 232-a, entitled "Notice to terminate monthly tenancy or tenancy from month to month in the city of New York". The three possible time frames for notice under RPL § 232-a (30, 60 and 90 days) are found in RPL § 226-c(2), entitled "Notice of rent increase or non-renewal of residential tenancy". RPL § 226-c, in turn, was amended by the GCEL to mandate the additional notice required by RPL § 231-c.

Other Sections in This Document (50)

Full Text