DA Can't Veto Settlement of Illegal Use Eviction Proceeding

March 31, 2009

LVT Number: #21110

Landlord sued to evict tenant for illegal use of her apartment under the “bawdy house” law after the district attorney (DA) ordered him to do so. Tenant’s son had been charged with possession of drugs and weapons found in the apartment. Landlord and tenant proposed a settlement agreement putting tenant on probation for five years. Under the agreement, tenant would be evicted only if her son returned to the apartment. The DA claimed that Real Property and Proceedings Law (RPAPL) Section 715 gave his office the authority to veto the deal.

Landlord sued to evict tenant for illegal use of her apartment under the “bawdy house” law after the district attorney (DA) ordered him to do so. Tenant’s son had been charged with possession of drugs and weapons found in the apartment. Landlord and tenant proposed a settlement agreement putting tenant on probation for five years. Under the agreement, tenant would be evicted only if her son returned to the apartment. The DA claimed that Real Property and Proceedings Law (RPAPL) Section 715 gave his office the authority to veto the deal. Tenant then sued the DA. The court and appeals court ruled for tenant. Although the DA was serving the public welfare, he didn’t have the authority to veto the settlement agreement reached by landlord and tenant.

Perdomo v. Morgenthau: NYLJ, 3/9/09, p. 27, col. 6 (App. Div. 1 Dept.; Tom, JP, Moskowitz, Renwick, Freedman, JJ)

Topics

More like this