Credit: Vitalii Vodolazskyi/Adobe Stock Be Careful What You Stip For: 'Liggett v. Lewitt Realty LLC'
The ruling from New York's highest state court, although straightforward on its face, has important implications for both long-existing settlement agreements and when considering drafting future agreements settling disputes in the context of the Rent Stabilization Law.
September 06, 2024 at 03:14 PM
8 minute read
Landlord Tenant Law
What You Need to Know
- The NY Court of Appeals has held that a stipulation of settlement entered into by a landlord and future tenant more than two decades ago, to settle a holdover proceeding, was void as against public policy.
- The decision provides a clear warning and guidance that any stipulation of settlement, to be enforceable, must never contain an express waiver of any rights held by tenants under the rent laws.
- The decision invites challenges to any stipulations, no matter how old, that contain express waivers of rights.
In June 2024, the Court of Appeals decided Liggett v. Lewitt Realty LLC, — NY3d –, 2024 NY Slip Op 03378 (2024), reversing the Appellate Division, First Judicial Department, and holding that a so-ordered stipulation of settlement entered into by a landlord and future tenant more than two decades ago, to settle a holdover proceeding in March 2000, was void as against public policy, and therefore could not provide a basis in the 2021 action for the landlord to establish that the subject apartment was properly deregulated from rent stabilization decades earlier. The ruling from New York's highest state court, although straightforward on its face, has important implications for both long-existing settlement agreements and when considering drafting future agreements settling disputes in the context of the Rent Stabilization Law.
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 All
State Appellate Court Orders New Trial After Judge Denies Rescheduling, Despite Counsel's Health Emergency
Yachts, Jets, Horses & Hooch: Specialized Commercial Leasing Models
'Trapped in the Floor': $5.25M Settlement Reached Years After Tenant's Death
10 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Commentary: James Madison, Meet Matt Gaetz
- 2The Narcissist’s Dilemma: Balancing Power and Inadequacy in Family Law
- 3Leopard Solutions Launches AI Navigator, a Gen AI Search, Data Extraction Tool
- 4Trump's SEC Likely to Halt 'Off-Channel' Texting Probe That's Led to Billions in Fines
- 5Special Section: Products Liability, Mass Torts & Class Action/Personal Injury
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
