Since nonpayments and holdover cases are designed to be resolved expeditiously, it's never a good thing to allow these disputes to languish.
While they can be held in abeyance for a whole host of reasons, once a matter is "marked off," and no longer on the court's calendar, getting it back before a judge can prove to be quite a challenge -- especially when an adversary is resistant and too much time has elapsed.
In Grossman v. Homenny , the owners sought to resurrect a holdover proceeding some 22 months after the case had been "marked off." Not only did the New York County Civil Court deny that request, but it granted the tenants' cross-motion to dismiss the entire case.
On appeal, the Appellate Term, First Department, agreed with that outcome, citing the landlords' failure "to demonstrate a meritorious claim, a reasonable excuse for the delay, a lack of intent to abandon the proceeding and an absence of prejudice to the elderly tenants."
Is this a testament to the Homennys' hegemony?
To view a copy of the Appellate Term's decision, please use this link: Grossman v. Homenny