Missing MDR Doesn't Bar Eviction of Month-to-Month Tenant

April 30, 2007

LVT Number: #19576

Landlord sued to evict tenant after sending tenant notice that he was terminating tenant's month-to-month tenancy. The court ruled for landlord. There was no question that tenant had no lease, and that landlord sent the termination notice properly. Tenant appealed, claiming that landlord couldn't go forward with the eviction proceeding, because the building wasn't properly registered as a multiple dwelling. It was an illegal three-family dwelling. The appeals court ruled against tenant. A missing MDR would prevent landlord from suing for nonpayment of rent.

Landlord sued to evict tenant after sending tenant notice that he was terminating tenant's month-to-month tenancy. The court ruled for landlord. There was no question that tenant had no lease, and that landlord sent the termination notice properly. Tenant appealed, claiming that landlord couldn't go forward with the eviction proceeding, because the building wasn't properly registered as a multiple dwelling. It was an illegal three-family dwelling. The appeals court ruled against tenant. A missing MDR would prevent landlord from suing for nonpayment of rent. But it didn't bar landlord from maintaining a holdover proceeding against tenant after tenancy expired.

Aspilaire v. St. Louis: NYLJ, 4/16/07, p. 35, col. 3 (App. T. 2 Dept.; Pesce, PJ, Golia, Rios, JJ)

Topics

More like this