Landlord's Notice to Quit to Son After Tenant's Death Was Proper and Sufficient

LVT Number: 33442

Landlord sued to evict occupant of project-based Section 8 apartment after tenant died. The occupant claimed that he was tenant's son and had succession rights. Landlord claimed that the occupant was now a licensee no longer authorized to occupy the unit. Occupant asked the court to dismiss the case without trial. He claimed that the predicate notice to vacate was confusing and contradictory. He also claimed that the predicate notice was improperly served because one copy was left on the apartment door but no other copy was received by certified or regular mail. 

Landlord sued to evict occupant of project-based Section 8 apartment after tenant died. The occupant claimed that he was tenant's son and had succession rights. Landlord claimed that the occupant was now a licensee no longer authorized to occupy the unit. Occupant asked the court to dismiss the case without trial. He claimed that the predicate notice to vacate was confusing and contradictory. He also claimed that the predicate notice was improperly served because one copy was left on the apartment door but no other copy was received by certified or regular mail. 

The court ruled against tenant, finding the predicate notice was proper. There was no requirement that a 10-day notice to quit under RPAPL Section 713(7) state the precise nature of the license or describe how the occupant came into possession. Here, landlord's predicate notice met the necessary pleading requirements for such notice. The notice claimed that the tenant had died and that any license she granted to the occupant to live with her had been revoked by landlord. Landlord also had given occupant 30 days to vacate, when the law required only 10 days. A letter sent from the leasing office in 2023 that stated that occupant was a co-occupant with his mother in the apartment wasn't inconsistent with characterizing occupant as a licensee following his mother's death.

The court also denied occupant's request to dismiss the case for improper service of the predicate notice. Landlord's process server made a sworn statement that the predicate notice was delivered to an adult person who answered the apartment door. The occupant's conclusory denial of receipt of the predicate notice, without other documentary proof or probative facts, was insufficient to overcome the presumption of proper service. No dismissal or traverse hearing was warranted. The case would go forward either through settlement or trial.

Greenport Preserv. LP v. Bennett: Index No. L&T 300056/24, 2024 NY Slip Op 33494(U)(Civ. Ct. Queens; 10/2/24; Schiff, J)