Landlord's Termination Notice Claiming Nonprimary Residence Was Defective

Landlord sued to evict Mitchell-Lama co-op shareholder tenant for nonprimary residence and unlawful subletting without landlord's consent. Tenants asked the court to dismiss the case, claiming that landlord's notice to cure and termination notice were too vague. The court ruled for tenants. The notice to cure claimed tenants didn't reside in the apartment but were believed to be living in New Jersey while other people lived in the apartment without landlord's knowledge or consent. This was a sufficient allegation, but the termination notice was defective. It stated that tenants failed to cure because they were still in New Jersey, but the sole allegation was that tenants hadn't cured their "occupancy" at the other address. Without more, this claim was insufficient to support the reasons stated for terminating the tenancy.

First Hous. Co. v. Orozco: 2019 NY Slip Op 51224, NYLJ No. 1566889092 (Civ. Ct. Queens; 8/1/19; Guthrie, J)