We have previously discussed in this column the critical importance of including in a notice terminating a lease, based on the failure to cure defaults set forth in a notice to cure, sufficient facts establishing that the tenant failed to cure. A recent decision by Judge David Harris of the Kings County Civil Court in 266 Washington Ave. Inv. LLC v. Davis, Index No. L&T 66535/19 (Civ Ct Kings Co, Dec 6, 2019) (Davis) stands as an important reminder to landlords and their counsel of the harsh consequences of failing to include adequate factual allegations in a notice of termination, particularly in circumstances involving the termination of a rent stabilized tenancy.

‘Davis’

In Davis, the landlord sought possession of a rent stabilized apartment in the building located at 266 Washington Avenue in Brooklyn. The subject 10-day notice to cure served on the tenants, Jobe Davis and Claudine Davis, alleged, “upon information and belief,” that the number of occupants in the apartment exceeded the number of tenants specified in the lease, and that the tenant had engaged in “profiteering” in violation of Section 2525.7 of the Rent Stabilization Code (the “RSC”). The notice to cure further set forth the amount that the landlord alleged was charged to each respondent.