What's worse than losing a significant other?
How about getting evicted from a regulated apartment?
In 72A Realty Associates v. Kutno , the New York County Civil Court was of the opinion that Jill E. Wright had established an independent entitlement to remain in the apartment after Michael Kutno (the tenant-of-record) permanently surrendered the unit.
Wright and Kutno began their "spousal-type relationship in the mid-1980's." In late 1999, things deteriorated to such an "intolerable" level that Wright informed Kutno she was not interested in continuing the arrangement.
Kutno graciously allowed Wright to occupy the regulated unit, with Kutno paying the rent and executing renewal leases in his name until October 31, 2003, when he formally abandoned or "vacated" the apartment.
The nature and length of the relationship was sufficient to convince a New York County Civil Court judge that Wright could remain as a tenant in her own right (pursuant to the governing "succession" provisions of the Rent Stabilization Law).
Interestingly, the Appellate Term, First Department, reversed that outcome on appeal.
The AT1 was of the opinion that an occupant's succession claim is to be determined from the date of the tenant-of-record's formal surrender of the premises to the landlord (and not from the date the tenant actually moved out or established residence elsewhere).
By applying this 2003 formal surrender date, Wright was unable to satisfy the two-year contemporaneous occupancy standard espoused by the rent regulations -- particularly since Kutno had moved out back in December of 1999 -- and that gap subjected Wright to eviction.
Ironically, the "civil" and "amicable" way her 16-year relationship with Kutno ended worked to Wright's detriment.* In addition to an award of legal fees, the appellate court concluded that the landlord was also entitled to fair-market rent as of the date Wright's license to occupy the unit had been formally terminated.
Isn't there a place for civility in landlord-tenant law?
And how could an individual's 16-year occupancy of a regulated unit be so readily discounted?
"Good night, good night! Parting is such sweet sorrow,
That I shall say good night till it be morrow."
For a copy of the Appellate Term's decision, please use this link: 72A Realty Associates v. Kutno
For our other blog posts on this topic, please use this link: Succession
---------------------------
*The Civil Court acknowledged the inequity of discounting the long-term nature of the relationship as follows:
It is normal for long-term intimate partners to end a relationship gradually, not abruptly. If the parties were legally married, the fact of their gradual breakup would not be a basis to deny succession protection to the remaining spouse. The succession provisions were intended to provide persons in non-traditional relationships with the same protection of their homes as legal family members. Respondent Wright should not denied succession protection of her home merely because her sixteen year intimate relationship with Kutno ended gradually. The succession provisions of the Rent Stabilization Code are remedial regulations designed to protect non-traditional family members from eviction. They are to be liberally construed to extend their benefit to all occupants they are designed to protect ....
For a copy of the Civil Court' decision, please use this link: 72A Realty Associates v. Kutno (Civil Court)