Court Upholds ERAP Stay Despite Substantial Rent Arrears Predating March 13, 2020

Landlord sued to evict unregulated tenants in a holdover proceeding after tenants' lease expired in 2018. Landlord obtained a money judgment for rent arrears owed as of Jan. 15, 2020, in the amount of $279,000, and an eviction warrant was issued. After various stays ended, the eviction warrant was executed on Feb. 8, 2022. The court then granted tenants' motion to be restored to possession because landlord hadn't notified the court that tenants had filed an ERAP application in August 2021. The Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance (OTDA) had denied the ERAP application, but one tenant had filed an appeal, which was pending, as well as a second ERAP application. Landlord asked the court to vacate the ERAP stay, pointed out that most of the rent arrears accrued prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, and ERAP would cover up to only $97,500 of the total $487,500 in arrears now due. 

The court ruled against landlord, finding that the ERAP law provides for stays even where only "part of" the rent arrears would be covered. Since it wasn't clear whether an appeal of a second application would take more time than a new application, the court couldn't find that tenant's second ERAP application was abusive. The court found that, despite some other court decisions to the contrary, the legislative intent should control here and the ERAP stay remain in place. The ERAP law applies both to nonpayment and holdover proceedings and, in this case, nonpayment of the rent owed was the central issue. 

Gurevitch v. Robinson, Index No. L&T72639/18 (Civ. Ct. Kings; 5/31/22; Stoller, J)[6-pg. document]