No Rent Abatement for Damaged Parquet Floor

June 30, 1997

LVT Number: 11629

(Decision submitted by Joel A. Mitofsky of the Manhattan law firm of Mitofsky & Shapiro, attorneys for the landlord.) Landlord sued to evict tenant for nonpayment of rent. Landlord and tenant stipulated to an $800 rent abatement, and landlord agreed to correct four HPD violations. Tenant later claimed that landlord hadn't made repairs. Tenant claimed there were continuous leaks and that landlord hadn't repaired the parquet floors. Tenant sought a further rent abatement. The court ruled against tenant. Landlord had repaired the four violations agreed upon.

(Decision submitted by Joel A. Mitofsky of the Manhattan law firm of Mitofsky & Shapiro, attorneys for the landlord.) Landlord sued to evict tenant for nonpayment of rent. Landlord and tenant stipulated to an $800 rent abatement, and landlord agreed to correct four HPD violations. Tenant later claimed that landlord hadn't made repairs. Tenant claimed there were continuous leaks and that landlord hadn't repaired the parquet floors. Tenant sought a further rent abatement. The court ruled against tenant. Landlord had repaired the four violations agreed upon. The fact that landlord hadn't repaired the parquet floor in the center room didn't make the apartment uninhabitable and wasn't a dangerous condition.

Rudin Estates Co. v. Romanovsky: Index L&T No. 92464/94 (2/27/97) (Civ. Ct. NY; Doherty, J) [4-page document]

Topics

More like this