Tenant Claims Building Lacked C of O

Landlord sued to evict tenant for nonpayment of rent. Landlord and tenant agreed by stipulation to delay the case for possible resolution. Landlord was to correct certain building violations and tenant was to give access on specified dates. Landlord and tenant both reserved the right to bring the case back to court for remaining issues including rent owed and rent abatement. When landlord later tried to revive the case, tenant claimed that the building had no C of O. Tenant argued that under Multiple Dwelling Law sections 301 and 302, landlord therefore couldn't collect rent. The court ruled for tenant and dismissed the case. Landlord appealed, and the appeals court ruled for landlord and reopened the case. Landlord and tenant had limited the issues in the case by their stipulation. The issues were repairs, rent due, and rent abatement. Tenant didn't preserve any rent forfeiture defense.

Gottlieb v. Marco: NYLJ, p. 28, col. 3 (4/28/95) (App. T. 1 Dept.; Parness, JP, McCooe, Glen, JJ)