Occupant Entitled to Hotel Stabilization Not Entitled to Attorney's Fees

Occupant sued landlord for illegal lockout, claiming that he became a permanent tenant of a hotel-stabilized unit at landlord’s building. The court ruled against occupant, who appealed and won. Occupant used “points” under a Wyndham hotel rewards program to pay for his scheduled one-night accommodation at the hotel, and then requested a six-month lease shortly after checking in. The court considered the use of points a payment of “rent,” as defined by the Rent Stabilization Code. The case was sent back to housing court for consideration of occupant’s claim. The housing court then ruled for occupant and ordered that he be restored to possession. The housing court denied occupant any sanctions against landlord or attorney’s fees.

Occupant appealed and lost. He was entitled to possession of the hotel dwelling unit, but the trial court didn’t abuse its discretion when it denied sanctions against landlord and its attorneys. Landlord’s defense, including their specific argument that the rewards points at issue didn’t constitute rent, was an issue of first impression and wasn’t a frivolous claim. Landlord’s brief delay in complying with the restoration order didn’t rise to the level of willful behavior, and the delay wasn’t due to bad faith. The court noted that if occupant continued to attack the court and landlord’s attorneys, he may be subject to sanctions.

Mondrow v. Days Inns Worldwide, Inc.: 2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 26316, 2016 WL 5793443 (App. T. 1 Dept.; 10/4/16; Shulman, JP, Gonzalez, J)