Landlord Didn't Send Cure Notice to Former Rent-Stabilized Tenant

Prior landlord signed a relocation agreement with rent-stabilized tenant by which tenant agreed to move into a condominium apartment in exchange for consideration and subject to certain conditions. Under the agreement, tenant became a free market tenant for her life, her rent would be increased periodically by Rent Guidelines increases, and tenant's son could live in the apartment as long as tenant maintained the apartment as her primary residence. The lease signed by tenant for the condo apartment provided for a 10-day cure notice in the event of a default. New landlord of the condo apartment later sent tenant a lease termination notice based on tenant's nonprimary residence and started an ejectment action against tenant. Tenant asked the court to dismiss the case because landlord didn't send a notice to cure. The court ruled for tenant.

Landlord appealed and lost. Landlord argued that, under rent stabilization, a cure notice wasn't needed in a nonprimary residence case. But tenant wasn't rent stabilized. Under her lease, she was only treated like a rent-stabilized tenant for certain purposes such as rent increases. Since tenant's lease specifically provided for a cure notice before a termination notice was sent, the case was properly dismissed.

235 W Units LLC v. Zeballos: 2015 NY Slip Op 03053, 2015 WL 156847 (App. Div. 1 Dept.; 4/9/15; Tom, JP, Sweeny, Renwick, Andrias, JJ)