Trial Needed on Whether There Was Illusory Tenancy

December 1, 2009

LVT Number: #22301

Landlord sued to evict subtenant. Subtenant asked the court to dismiss the case without a trial. He claimed that the apartment was rent stabilized and that the prime tenant was illusory. The court ruled for subtenant. Landlord appealed, and the case was reopened. The rent regulatory status of the apartment was uncertain. And even if subtenant had an illusory tenancy claim, he hadn't proved so far that the rent laws had been violated in a way that allowed the prime tenant to rent the apartment for the purpose of subleasing for profit. A trial was needed to determine the facts.

Landlord sued to evict subtenant. Subtenant asked the court to dismiss the case without a trial. He claimed that the apartment was rent stabilized and that the prime tenant was illusory. The court ruled for subtenant. Landlord appealed, and the case was reopened. The rent regulatory status of the apartment was uncertain. And even if subtenant had an illusory tenancy claim, he hadn't proved so far that the rent laws had been violated in a way that allowed the prime tenant to rent the apartment for the purpose of subleasing for profit. A trial was needed to determine the facts.

Ogisu Corp. v. Allen: NYLJ, 11/17/09, p. 33, col. 1 (App. T. 1 Dept.; McKeon, PJ, Shulman, Hunter, JJ)

Topics

More like this