Court Denies Request for Discovery Made by Tenant Claiming Fraudulent Rent Overcharge

Landlord sued to evict rent-stabilized tenant for nonpayment of rent. In response and among other things, tenant claimed fraudulent rent overcharge. Tenant asked the court for permission to conduct discovery reaching back to 1993 on the question of fraud. The court ruled against tenant, finding that tenant didn't address in his motion request when he knew to request and review his DHCR rent registration history, or how long ago he previously examined the DHCR rent registration history. Nor did tenant's sworn statement explain how he was lulled into inaction to challenge the rent. And, while it was possible to assume that tenant alleged harm, that wasn't the court's function and tenant didn't specifically plead facts regarding how he was injured. 

Notably, the court's decision pointed out that, while bound by cited case law in making its ruling, there were other factors that could be considered in some cases. The court also stated that, "the confusion and consternation related to fraudulent overcharge claims may soon be moot" if the governor signs into law the State Assembly's 2023 Bill A06216, which clarifies and codifies the standard for applying a fraud exception to the four-year statute of limitations in place before HSTPA was enacted.

41-47 Nick LLC v. Odumosu: Index No. 320222/22, 2023 NY Slip Op 23311 (Civ. Ct. NY; 10/12/23; Bacdayan, J)