RP Wimbledon Owner, LLC v. Chisholm, 2025 NY Slip Op 25071 (2025)

Citation: RP Wimbledon Owner, LLC v. Chisholm, 2025 NY Slip Op 25071 (2025)
Parent Document: RP Wimbledon Owner, LLC v. Chisholm, 2025 NY Slip Op 25071 (2025)
Jurisdiction: New York (state)
Effective Date: 2025-03-21
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10363714/rp-wimbledon-owner-llc-v-chisholm/ ↗

Full Text

1,054 chars

Applying the Weiss-Newell standard to the Notice of Non-Renewal yields the conclusion that the notice was unreasonable under the circumstances. While it recited the statutory provision upon which the termination was based, it failed to clearly inform Respondent of the period for which rent was due or the approximate sum owed. Rent demands that fail to provide such basic notice of alleged rent arrears are consistently rejected by the courts (see, e.g., EOM 106-15 217th Corp. v Severine, 62 Misc 3d 141 [A] [App Term, 2d Dept 2019] [rent demand misstated period for which rent was owed due to misattribution of earmarked payment]; 75 Wall Associates LLC v Zordan, 78 Misc 3d 1236 [A] [Civ Ct, NY Cnty 2023] ["The demand itself must apprise the Respondent of the rents owed and for what periods, not, as Petitioner argues, the demand in combination with whatever documents the Respondent may possess."]). Therefore, the Notice of Non-Renewal was unreasonable under the circumstances, and this holdover proceeding predicated thereupon must be dismissed.

Other Sections in This Document (37)

Full Text