Tenant's Boyfriend Wasn't ‘Family Member'

January 1, 1994

LVT Number: 8444

Landlord sued to evict rent-stabilized tenant's boyfriend after tenant moved out of the apartment. The boyfriend claimed that he was a remaining family member and was entitled to pass-on rights. He'd lived in the apartment with tenant for ten years. He also claimed they had a committed love relationship during this time, until they broke up and she moved out. The court ruled for landlord. Boyfriend had had a long relationship with tenant. They held themselves out as a couple, and shared household expenses and duties. But their relationship didn't rise to an in-depth commitment.

Landlord sued to evict rent-stabilized tenant's boyfriend after tenant moved out of the apartment. The boyfriend claimed that he was a remaining family member and was entitled to pass-on rights. He'd lived in the apartment with tenant for ten years. He also claimed they had a committed love relationship during this time, until they broke up and she moved out. The court ruled for landlord. Boyfriend had had a long relationship with tenant. They held themselves out as a couple, and shared household expenses and duties. But their relationship didn't rise to an in-depth commitment. There were no joint bank accounts, no joint credit cards, no joint property ownership, and no other indication of formalized legal obligations. There was no domestic partnership declaration. The boyfriend had no will, and the contents of tenant's will weren't known.

Eberhart v. Randall: NYLJ, p. 23, col. 1 (12/1/93) (Civ. Ct. NY; Dubinsky, J)

Topics

More like this