1250 Broadway, 27th Floor New York, NY 10001

OFF-TRACK NOTICING?

Before a summary eviction proceeding known as a "holdover" can be started, an owner may need to serve the occupant(s) with one or more notices. The number and type of notices that need be given, (if any), will be determined by the legal theory being employed to recover the commercial or residential space.

For example, if a landlord seeks to take back a regulated apartment for "owner's use," 90 to 150 days prior to the expiration of a stabilized tenant's lease, an owner must serve a "notice of non-renewal," delineating (among other things) the name of the person who will be occupying the apartment upon its recovery and that individual's relationship to the landlord.

Be forewarned: These documents will be subjected to exacting scrutiny, as was demonstrated by the case of Hirsch v. Stewart . In that dispute, the New York County Civil Court dismissed an "owner's use" case based on the notice's factual deficiency. Apparently, the landlord merely copied the language that appeared in the statute, and omitted any additional information as to why he needed to recover the unit and what his intentions were. That omission was enough to bring the case to an end.

On appeal, the Appellate Term, First Department, affirmed the dismissal. As the AT1 noted:

Landlord's notice failed to comply with the specificity requirements of Rent Stabilization Code (9 NYCRR) § 2524.2(b), since it merely "tracked the statutory language for nonrenewal upon the ground of owner occupancy ... without setting forth allegations fact specific to this proceeding" ....

So, when it comes to most predicate notices, more facts are better than less.

(That, you can track!)

For a copy of the Appellate Term's decision, please use this link: Hirsch v. Stewart

Categories: