Tenant Bound by Settlement Agreement

Prior landlord rented an apartment to tenant in 2004 under a deregulated lease at $5,000 per month. At the time, prior landlord was receiving J-51 tax benefits, which expired five months later. Tenant's lease was renewed until 2008. Tenant then became month-to-month. New landlord sent tenant a 30-day termination notice in 2009 and then started an eviction proceeding. Landlord and tenant, represented by attorneys, settled the case in court. Tenant agreed to a judgment for landlord and the issuance of an eviction warrant. Eviction was delayed until Dec. 31, provided that tenant paid $5,200 per month until then. Tenant later asked the court to vacate the settlement agreement. He claimed that he was rent stabilized under the Court of Appeals ruling inRoberts v. Tishman Speyer, so the settlement violated public policy. The court ruled for tenant. Landlord appealed and won. Settlement agreements shouldn't be set aside absent fraud, mistake, or violation of public policy. Tenant was represented by an experienced landlord-tenant attorney, and engaged in lengthy negotiations with landlord. The
Roberts case and decision were widely publicized while tenant's case was pending, and the settlement agreement didn't say that tenant was waiving any rights under rent stabilization. And in 2002, the DHCR had ruled that the apartment was deregulated in response to a prior tenant's fair market rent appeal. At that time, the first stabilized rent was over $2,000. There was no appeal of the DHCR's decision.

SAP V/Atlas 845 WEA Associates NF LLC v. Jannelli: NYLJ, 1/6/11, p. 30, col. 5 (App. T. 1 Dept.; Hunter, JP, McKeon, Shulman, JJ)