Building Not Part of Horizontal Multiple Dwelling

March 1, 1994

LVT Number: 8631

Landlord sued to evict tenant, claiming tenant was a month-to-month tenant. Tenant claimed he was rent-stabilized. The trial court ruled for landlord, and tenant appealed. The appeals court ruled against tenant. Tenant claimed his building was part of a horizontal multiple dwelling, subject to rent stabilization. But landlord proved that the building had entirely separate utility service---heating, hot water, sewerage, electricity, and gas---as well as a separate tax block and lot, certificate of occupancy, multiple dwelling registration, and building entrance.

Landlord sued to evict tenant, claiming tenant was a month-to-month tenant. Tenant claimed he was rent-stabilized. The trial court ruled for landlord, and tenant appealed. The appeals court ruled against tenant. Tenant claimed his building was part of a horizontal multiple dwelling, subject to rent stabilization. But landlord proved that the building had entirely separate utility service---heating, hot water, sewerage, electricity, and gas---as well as a separate tax block and lot, certificate of occupancy, multiple dwelling registration, and building entrance. The fact that landlord owned three contiguous buildings, including tenant's, wasn't enough in and of itself to connect the buildings as one, in light of all the other facts.

Duell v. Roberts: NYLJ, p. 28, col. 5 (2/18/94) (App. T. 1 Dept.; Parness, JP, McCooe, Glen, JJ)

Topics

More like this