Unregulated Tenants Not Protected from Eviction

Landlord submitted proposed noneviction condominium conversion plan to the New York State attorney general's office on Feb. 1, 2006. Shortly thereafter, landlord sued to evict 29 unregulated tenants whose leases had expired. Tenants asked the court to dismiss the cases before filing answers to the petitions. They claimed that they were protected from eviction by the Martin Act. The court ruled against tenants, finding they weren't protected during the "red herring" stage of the conversion. A few days later, on March 1, 2007, the attorney general accepted landlord's offering plan. Tenants then answered the petitions and asked the court to dismiss the cases, again relying on the Martin Act. This time, the court ruled for tenants and dismissed the cases, finding that tenants were now covered.
Landlord appealed and won. At the time that landlord's offering plan was accepted, tenants were no longer "tenants in occupancy." Their leases had expired, and they were merely holding over. The Martin Act protects only tenants in occupancy at the time the offering plan is accepted for filing. Since there was no longer a landlord-tenant relationship between any of the tenants and landlord, landlord could proceed with eviction actions. Evictions were delayed for 60 days.

MH Residential I, LLC v. Barrett: NYLJ, 12/8/08, p. 28, col. 1 (App. T. 1 Dept.; McKeon, PJ, Davis, Schoenfeld, JJ)