If you are not named on a lease, haven't paid directly rent to the landlord, and/or, are not protected by some form of rent regulation, chances are the law will consider you to be a "licensee" -- someone whose right to occupy commercial or residential space can be terminated on as little as ten days' written notice.
In Rabney v. Adams , Marilyn Adams, a former tenant of an apartment, found out that her status was reduced to that of a mere "licensee," as a result of a 1998 settlement divorce decree wherein she had surrendered her interests in the unit.
When Arthur Rabney, the named tenant of the apartment, sought to evict Adams, he filed a licensee holdover proceeding with the New York County Civil Court. Finding that Adams had relinquished her rights to the premises pursuant to the decree, both the Civil Court and the Appellate Term, First Department, concluded that she could now be removed from the apartment.
In an interesting twist, even though Rabney was the "prevailing party" in the case, his request for legal fees was denied since there was no lease agreement between the parties and the provisions of the parties' divorce settlement did not govern the holdover proceeding (since the dispute "did not arise from any default under the divorce decree").
A former spouse as roommate. Interesting concept, no?*
For a copy of the Appellate Term's decision, please use this link: Rabney v. Adams
----------------------------
*If Ms. Adams continued to occupy the unit since relinquishing the unit back in 1998, wasn't she really a "tenant-at will" or "at-sufferance," entitled to a 30-day termination notice?