Beverly Hotel Assoc. LLC v. De Almeida

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Beverly Hotel Assoc. LLC v. De Almeida

194 Misc. 2d 538, 754 N.Y.S.2d 818, 2003 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 54

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJanuary 23, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 194 Misc. 2d 538 (Beverly Hotel Assoc. LLC v. De Almeida) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Beverly Hotel Assoc. LLC v. De Almeida, 194 Misc. 2d 538, 754 N.Y.S.2d 818, 2003 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 54 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Order dated April 12, 2002 affirmed, with $10 costs.

[539]*539The respondent is a permanent hotel tenant (see, Rent Stabilization Code [9 NYCRR] § 2520.6 [j]) who requested a written lease and, when offered one by landlord containing a jury waiver, declined to sign it. Civil Court dismissed this holdover brought on account of tenant’s “unreasonable” refusal to “renew the lease as required by law,” and we affirm. While a landlord is required, on request, to “grant a lease” to a hotel resident (see, Rent Stabilization Code [9 NYCRR] § 2522.5 [a] [2]), the resident may not be compelled to accept it on pain of eviction. Landlord’s tender of a lease was no more than an offer which tenant was entitled to reject. Contrary to landlord’s argument, the right to request a lease does not imply a “duty” to execute it. Moreover, under the code, a statutory hotel tenant is not required to execute a lease or renew an expiring lease (§ 2522.5 [a] [2]; § 2524.3 [f]).

Landlord’s reliance upon 6 Greene St. Assoc. v Robbins (256 AD2d 169) is misplaced, as that case concerns the obligation of a tenant to sign an initial rent stabilized lease following the transition from coverage under the Loft Law.

McCooe, J.P., Gangel-Jacob and Schoenfeld, JJ,, concur.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Order dated April 12, 2002 affirmed, with $10 costs.

[539]*539The respondent is a permanent hotel tenant (see, Rent Stabilization Code [9 NYCRR] § 2520.6 [j]) who requested a written lease and, when offered one by landlord containing a jury waiver, declined to sign it. Civil Court dismissed this holdover brought on account of tenant’s “unreasonable” refusal to “renew the lease as required by law,” and we affirm. While a landlord is required, on request, to “grant a lease” to a hotel resident (see, Rent Stabilization Code [9 NYCRR] § 2522.5 [a] [2]), the resident may not be compelled to accept it on pain of eviction. Landlord’s tender of a lease was no more than an offer which tenant was entitled to reject. Contrary to landlord’s argument, the right to request a lease does not imply a “duty” to execute it. Moreover, under the code, a statutory hotel tenant is not required to execute a lease or renew an expiring lease (§ 2522.5 [a] [2]; § 2524.3 [f]).

Landlord’s reliance upon 6 Greene St. Assoc. v Robbins (256 AD2d 169) is misplaced, as that case concerns the obligation of a tenant to sign an initial rent stabilized lease following the transition from coverage under the Loft Law.

McCooe, J.P., Gangel-Jacob and Schoenfeld, JJ,, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

194 Misc. 2d 538, 754 N.Y.S.2d 818, 2003 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 54, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beverly-hotel-assoc-llc-v-de-almeida-nyappterm-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack