1212 Grand Concourse LLC v. Ynguil, 27 Misc. 3d 205 (2010)

Citation: 1212 Grand Concourse LLC v. Ynguil, 27 Misc. 3d 205 (2010)
Parent Document: 1212 Grand Concourse LLC v. Ynguil, 27 Misc. 3d 205 (2010)
Jurisdiction: New York (state)
Effective Date: 2010-01-08
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6311119/1212-grand-concourse-llc-v-ynguil/ ↗

Full Text

929 chars

In the same vein, the petitioners maintain that “good cause” is not a necessary element of their claims as they are no longer contractually bound by the laws and rules pertaining to Section 8. They say that because the landlord-tenant relationship had been automatically terminated they are no longer held to a contractual requirement to evict for cause and also that the “HAP Contract states that fault has no bearing.” (Id. If 14.) In addition, they believe that they should not be held to the requirements of the Williams Second Consent Judgment because the consequences of doing so would be unfair to them. The petitioners conclude that the Williams Second Consent Judgment should not serve as an obstacle to evicting the respondents solely because the leases were terminated. In addition, they assert that under these circumstances, certification to the NYCHA is not required, although in these cases they did in fact do so.

Other Sections in This Document (40)

Full Text