Landlord Requested Payment of Use and Occupancy Prematurely

Landlord sued to evict two apartment occupants after the unit's rent-controlled tenant died. The case was adjourned for two months on the initial return date to give the occupants a chance to obtain an attorney. Prior to the second court date, landlord filed a motion requesting use and occupancy both retroactively and while the case remained pending and pursuant to RPL Section 220. The occupants failed to appear on the second court date, and the court accepted landlord's motion for consideration. The court ruled against landlord, finding that RPL Section 220 was the wrong provision to rely on in a summary eviction proceeding because the immediate relief it might provide to the landlord was impractical and potentially prejudicial to the respondents in a Housing Court case where there could be reasons or defenses limiting whether and how much u&o respondents should pay while the case was pending. Landlord could require u&o under RPAPL Section 745(2) at an appropriate time. Meanwhile, since the occupants didn't show up on the second court date, the case was set down for an inquest.

Trustees of Columbia Univ. of the City of N.Y. v. Montgomery: Index No. LT-318621-23/NY, 2024 NY Slip Op 24030 (Civ. Ct. NY; 2/6/24; Bacdayan, J)