100 West 72nd Street Associates v. Murphy

144 Misc. 2d 1036, 545 N.Y.S.2d 901, 1989 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 559
CourtCivil Court of the City of New York
DecidedSeptember 11, 1989
StatusPublished
Cited by19 cases

This text of 144 Misc. 2d 1036 (100 West 72nd Street Associates v. Murphy) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Civil Court of the City of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
100 West 72nd Street Associates v. Murphy, 144 Misc. 2d 1036, 545 N.Y.S.2d 901, 1989 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 559 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1989).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Peter Tom, J.

The instant motion raises an interesting issue involving the situation where a tenant dies intestate with no personal representative appointed on behalf of the estate and the deceased tenant is a necessary party in the summary proceeding.

This situation has been a recurring problem in the Housing Court which this court shall address since research on this issue discloses no case precedent on point.

The petitioner landlord brings this summary eviction proceeding against the brother of the deceased tenant upon the [1038]*1038allegation that the decedent’s brother took possession of the rent-stabilized apartment as a licensee and upon the death of the tenant the license expired. The parties in this proceeding concede that the tenant of record has died and that the term of the current lease for the subject premises has not expired. Petitioner alleges that respondent took possession of the premises while the deceased tenant lived and died in California.

Respondent moves, in this motion, for an order dismissing the petition on the grounds that the deceased tenant of record or his personal representative is not named as a party respondent in the proceeding and based on other jurisdictional defects in the petition. Respondent asserts that the estate of the deceased tenant is a necessary party in the proceeding.

Petitioner did not name the estate as a respondent because a personal representative for the decedent’s estate has not yet been appointed, and that petitioner only seeks possession of the premises from respondent.

A license is a personal, revocable and nonassignable privilege to do one or more acts upon land without possessing any estate or interests therein. (Todd v Krolick, 96 AD2d 695; 1 Rasch, New York Landlord and Tenant — Summary Proceedings § 71, at 95 [2d ed].)

RPAPL 713 (7) permits a summary eviction proceeding to be brought against a licensee.

RPAPL 713 (7) provides that a special proceeding may be maintained upon the following grounds: "He is a licensee of the person entitled to possession of the property at the time of the license, and (a) his license has expired, or (b) his license has been revoked by the licensor, or (c) the licensor is no longer entitled to possession of the property; provided, however, that a mortgagee or lendee in possession shall not be deemed to be a licensee within the meaning of this subdivision.”

RPAPL 721 (7) sets forth the party who may maintain a summary proceeding against a licensee.

RPAPL 721 (7) provides that the proceeding to remove a licensee from real property may be brought by, "The person entitled to possession of the property occupied by a licensee who may be dispossessed.”

The party entitled to possession of the subject premises in this case is not the landlord but the estate of the deceased tenant.

A lease for a term of years which has not expired is not [1039]*1039terminated by the death of the lessee. (Remford Corp. v Rosenfeld, 274 App Div 769; 2 Rasch, New York Landlord and Tenant — Summary Proceedings § 1016, at 462 [2d ed].) Upon the death of the tenant the leasehold interest of the decedent becomes personal property of the estate. (EPTL 13-1.1; 2 Rasch, New York Landlord and Tenant — Summary Proceedings § 1016, at 462 [2d ed]; Putch v Jacard Realty Co., 44 Misc 2d 177.) The deceased tenant is substituted by the estate as a party to the lease which remains liable for the rent until the expiration of the lease or upon such time as the landlord releases the decedent’s estate from the leasehold obligations, whichever comes first. (Schnee v Jonas Equities, 109 Misc 2d. 221; Real Property Law § 236.) The executor of the estate has the right to remain in possession of the premises only in his capacity as a representative of the estate until the expiration of the lease term to wind up the business and affairs of the estate. (Joint Props. Owners v Deri, 113 AD2d 691; Lomnitz v 61 E. 86th St. Equities Group, 129 Misc 2d 157.)

In the instant case the unexpired leasehold interest of the subject stabilized apartment passes to the estate of the deceased tenant as his personal property. The estate is the party which is entitled to possession of the premises and is the proper party pursuant to RPAPL 721 (7) to bring a summary eviction proceeding to remove a licensee from the premises. (Young v Carruth, 89 AD2d 466; Benenson Inv. Co. v Ortiz, NYLJ, June 19, 1989, at 29, col 6.)

The landlord may not elect to evict a licensee from real property pursuant to RPAPL 713 (7) without first having legally recovered possession of the premises from the licensor or licensor’s estate as the party who is entitled to possession of the property occupied by a licensee. Petitioner has no standing to bring a summary eviction proceeding against respondent pursuant to RPAPL 713 (7) in this case.

Petitioner may commence the instant licensee summary proceeding against respondent if it had legally recovered possession of the apartment from the estate of the deceased tenant or the estate has relinquished all rights of the leasehold to the petitioner. We do not have such a situation in this case.

The death of a party terminates or revokes a license due to the personal nature of the privilege, and the right of the licensee to occupy the real property pursuant to the license ceases upon the death of the licensor. (49 NY Jur 2d, Ease[1040]*1040ments, § 223, at 352.) Real Property Law § 235-f provides that no occupant, without written consent of the landlord, acquires any right to continue occupancy in the event the tenant vacates the premises or acquires any other rights of tenancy. A licensee is an occupant under Real Property Law § 235-f. (1420 York Ave. Assocs. v Carey, NYLJ, June 6, 1985, at 7, col 3 [App Term, 1st Dept].)

Since the right of the licensee to occupy the premises expires upon the death of the licensor, the proper proceeding for petitioner to commence in this case is an action against the estate of the deceased tenant through a personal representative for permitting an illegal occupant to occupy the premises.

As to petitioner’s argument that it did not name the estate as a party respondent in this proceeding because no personal representative has been appointed on behalf of the estate, petitioner is advised that it may petition the Surrogate’s Court to have the Public Administrator appointed as the personal representative of the estate of the deceased tenant pursuant to SCPA 1001 (8) and 1002.

A party cannot bring a legal action or proceeding against a dead person without naming the estate through a personal representative nor can a party enter a personal judgment against a decedent. (Park Ten Assocs. v Rudell, NYLJ, Dec. 11, 1981, at 6, col 1 [App Term, 1st Dept]; see, CPLR 1015 [a].)

The estate of the deceased represents all of the property of the decedent. An estate is not a legal entity and any action for or against the estate must be by or against the executor or administrator in his or her representative capacity. (Gerzof v Glick, NYLJ, Sept. 9, 1980, at 12, col 3 [App Term, 9th & 10th Judicial Dists]; EPTL 1-2.6, 11-3.1; SCPA 103 [19]; 31 Am Jur 2d, Executors and Administrators, § 713.)

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Howansky v. Howansky
2025 NY Slip Op 52083(U) (Saratoga Surrogate's Court, 2025)
Board of Directors for Kings Oak Terrace Coop. Apts. Inc. v. Bersh
2024 NY Slip Op 51039(U) (NYC Civil Court, Kings, 2024)
1781 Riverside LLC v. Shuler
2024 NY Slip Op 50106(U) (NYC Civil Court, New York, 2024)
Matter of Foreclosure of Tax Liens v. Goldman
2018 NY Slip Op 7123 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Poulakas v. Ortiz
25 Misc. 3d 717 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 2009)
Marine Terrace Associates v. Kesoglides
24 Misc. 3d 35 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Grosso v. Estate of Gershenson
33 A.D.3d 587 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Jordan v. City of New York
23 A.D.3d 436 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Dime Savings Bank of New York FSB v. Luna
302 A.D.2d 558 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Estate of Hershkowitz v. Walker
192 Misc. 2d 340 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Boatright v. Derr
919 P.2d 221 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1996)
Laurenti v. Teatom
210 A.D.2d 300 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
Center Ave. Realty, Inc. v. Smith
624 A.2d 996 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1993)
Ryerson Towers Inc. v. Estate of Brown
156 Misc. 2d 614 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1993)
East Harlem Pilot Block Building 1 Housing Development Fund Corp. v. Serrano
153 Misc. 2d 776 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1992)
Westway Plaza Associates v. Doe
179 A.D.2d 408 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
170 West 85th Street Tenants Ass'n v. Cruz
173 A.D.2d 338 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
144 Misc. 2d 1036, 545 N.Y.S.2d 901, 1989 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 559, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/100-west-72nd-street-associates-v-murphy-nycivct-1989.