Judge Bruce E. Scheckowitz

 

Read Full-Text Decision

Petitioner sought to recover possession of the subject apartment in this holdover proceeding arguing Valentine was an unregulated month-to-month tenant whose tenancy was terminated after expiration of the 30-day termination notice. Valentine moved to dismiss the proceeding arguing the premises were rent stabilized, but the petition failed to properly plead its regulatory status. Respondents claimed the premises were subject to rent stabilization as it contained more than six residential units and was constructed before 1974. Petitioner argued violations for numerous illegally created units were dismissed, thus, summary judgment should be denied. The court noted buildings constructed before 1974 containing six or more residential units were subject to rent stabilization coverage. Also, appellate authority found the use of an illegal basement for residential purposes brought an entire building under the rubric of rent stabilization. Thus, reduction in the number of housing accommodations to fewer than six after placement by HPD of a violation did not exempt the remaining units from rent stabilization. Petitioner’s argument that removal of the violations prevented the building from stabilization coverage was unavailing, and respondents’ motion was granted.