Landlord Ordered To Return Security Deposit; Request To Stay Foreclosure Sale Denied: This Week in Scott Mollen's Realty Law Digest
Scott Mollen discusses "Masseroli v. Gatfield," and "U.S. Bank, National Association v. Nosratabdi."
July 30, 2024 at 02:40 PM
13 minute read
Landlord-Tenant—Landlord Ordered To Return Rent Security Deposit—Failure To Comply With GOL §7-108 (1-a)(c)-(e)—Tenant Claimed Landlord's Damage List Was Filled With "Lies And Exaggerations"—GOL §7-108(3) Provides That Any Agreement by a Tenant of a Dwelling Waiving or Modifying Any Rights Provided In the GOL With Respect to the Security Deposit Provisions Shall Be "Absolutely Void"—Statutory 14-Day Period Must Be Complied With Regardless of Lease Provision Which Gave Landlord 30 Days To Return the Security Deposit—Although Landlord Must Return the Security Deposit, Landlord May Pursue a Separate Litigation Against Tenant for Damages Beyond Ordinary Wear and Tear—Landlords Must Demonstrate That Damage "Rose to…Level of Extraordinary Damage" and Landlord Must Establish Reasonable Value of Repairs—Punitive Damages Denied
This decision arose from a dispute relating to a residential lease for property (premises) located in Bedford, New York. The plaintiff tenant, his family and two dogs occupied the premises. The tenant provided the landlord with a security deposit in the amount of $12,950.
The tenant commenced the subject action to recover his security deposit. He alleged that his family vacated the premises on or about March 30, 2022. He asserted that at least one month before such date, he asked the landlord to inspect the property and "conduct an exit walk through." The landlord did not conduct the requested inspection.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLetter to the Editor: Law Journal Used Misleading Photo for Article on Election Observers
1 minute readEstablishing the Prevailing Party; Failure To Comply With LLC Law; Takings Claim: This Week in Scott Mollen's Realty Law Digest
Using In Rem Jurisdiction to Ameliorate Artificial Intelligence Difficulties
5 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 3Guarantees Are Back, Whether Law Firms Want to Talk About Them or Not
- 4How I Made Practice Group Chair: 'If You Love What You Do and Put the Time and Effort Into It, You Will Excel,' Says Lisa Saul of Forde & O'Meara
- 5Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250