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/10363654/rp-wimbledon-owner-llc-v-chisholm/ ↗

Full Text

1,129 chars

A baseline requirement for any notice terminating a tenancy and serving as the basis for an eviction proceeding is that the notice be "clear, unambiguous and unequivocal" (City of Buffalo Urban Renewal Agency v Lane Bryant Queens, Inc., 90 AD2d 976, 977 [4th Dept 1982], aff'd 59 NY2d 825 [1983]).[FN1]
Termination notices have failed to meet the aforementioned standard where their language has been unclear regarding whether the lease was being terminated (see Ellivkroy Realty Corp v HDP 86 Sponsor Corp, 162 AD2d 238, 238 [1st Dept 1990]), when such termination would be effective (see Town of Islip v Kismet Park Corp., 38 Misc 3d 131 [A] [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2012]), and the consequences for the tenant upon termination (see, e.g., New York City Housing Auth. v Rosario, 65 Misc 3d 1205 [A] [Civ Ct, Bx Cnty 2019]). Here, the Notice of Non-Renewal satisfies this standard. It clearly and [*2]unambiguously indicates that the lease would not be renewed, that Respondent was directed to vacate by August 31, 2024, and that Petitioner would commence eviction proceedings if Respondent failed to vacate by that date.

Other Sections in This Document (33)

Full Text