Judge C. Gonzales
http://nycourts.law.com/CourtDocumentViewer.asp?view=Document&docID=118732
PETITIONER landlord began this holdover proceeding seeking possession of respondent tenant’s rent-stabilized apartment after serving a notice of termination. The notice terminated respondent’s tenancy based on her failure to comply with a notice to cure. Respondent, currently the only occupant of the six-family dwelling, moved for dismissal. She argued petitioner failed to provide her an opportunity to cure as petitioner failed to provide details of the apartment to which it sought to relocate her during the renovations of the subject building. The court noted neither of the two lease provisions petitioner cited granted it the authority to take possession of the apartment and required the relocation of the tenant. It stated petitioner’s argument that gut renovations were required to comply with housing laws was unavailing, noting repairs were not the equivalent of renovation. Also, it stated reasonable access was substantially different from temporarily relinquishing possession, noting petitioner provided no legal support for its position respondent was required to relocate to permit renovations. Thus, as the lease terms upon which petitioner relied provided no support for its claim respondent violated a substantial obligation of her tenancy, dismissal was granted.
