Tenant Owned Luxury Co-op in Riverdale

June 10, 2013

LVT Number: #24823

Landlord sued to evict rent-stabilized tenant of Manhattan apartment for nonprimary residence. The trial court ruled for landlord. Tenant appealed and lost. The trial judge didn't believe tenant's testimony. And landlord showed that tenant owned a luxury co-op apartment in Riverdale, was present there regularly, listed the Riverdale address as his residence in IRS and Surrogate's Court documents, spent less than 183 days in the Manhattan apartment, and used very little electricity at the Manhattan apartment during the time period in question.

Landlord sued to evict rent-stabilized tenant of Manhattan apartment for nonprimary residence. The trial court ruled for landlord. Tenant appealed and lost. The trial judge didn't believe tenant's testimony. And landlord showed that tenant owned a luxury co-op apartment in Riverdale, was present there regularly, listed the Riverdale address as his residence in IRS and Surrogate's Court documents, spent less than 183 days in the Manhattan apartment, and used very little electricity at the Manhattan apartment during the time period in question. The trial court fairly interpreted the evidence in ruling that tenant didn't primarily reside in the rent-stabilized apartment.

190 Claremont Realty, LLC v. Ruderman: 39 Misc.3d 144(A), 2013 NY Slip Op 50815(U) (App. T. 1 Dept.; 5/21/13; Lowe III, PJ, Shulman, Hunter Jr., JJ)

Topics

More like this