New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- Citation
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- Parent Document
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- Jurisdiction
- New York (state)
- Effective Date
- 2005-05-05
Other Sections in This Document (23)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
- New York City Housing Authority v. Pretto, 8 Misc. 3d 708 (2005)
Full Text
939 charsThe motion to dismiss the petition on the grounds that it is time-barred is granted. The court finds that a one-year statute of limitations applies to proceedings commenced under Real Property Law § 231 and RPAPL 711 and 715. The time in which to commence the proceeding runs from the date the alleged offense is committed. While it may be argued that the court’s ruling conveys an unfair benefit and reward to a tenant who allowed the premises to be used as an instrument in criminal *714activity, the court believes that the forfeiture of a leasehold is no different than forfeiture of personal property contemplated under CPLR article 13. Procedural safeguards are put into place under that statute to insure that the due process rights of the individuals, both criminal and noncriminal alike, are protected. Why then shouldn’t a tenant have similar safeguards where a landlord is requesting the court to forfeit the tenant’s leasehold.