Lewis v. Edwards
Excusable Default, Defective Termination Notice Warrants Vacatur and Dismissal
September 16, 2017 at 12:00 AM
3 minute read
Judge Joel R. Kullas
Lewis alleged Edward's monthly tenancy was terminated in this summary proceeding. Edwards failed to appear on the adjourn date and an inquest was held with judgment of possession entered in Lewis' favor. The same day, Edwards moved to vacate the default judgment and warrant, alleging he was late as his car was towed, and stated he had a lease in effect. The court denied the motion as Edwards failed to provide proof of his allegations. In this fourth pro se order to show cause (OSC) the court stated it would be treated as a motion to renew as Edwards' argument was based on evidence not presented at the prior OSC. He claimed his car was towed May 9, 2017 with court papers inside. Thus, he was unsure if his court date was May 15 or 17 and he arrived on May 15, but after the default time. Edwards attached a letter indicating the car was repossessed on May 9, hence, the court found he showed an excusable default. Also, evidence established Edwards was determined eligible for a renewal of his lease under the LINC V program, requiring Lewis to give Edwards a renewal lease on the same terms. As such, Edwards was not a month-to-month tenant and the notice of termination was defective. Vacatur of the default, and dismissal of the warrant and proceeding were granted.
Judge Joel R. Kullas
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
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 AllBinding a Successor Town Board; Default on Stipulation of Settlement: This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest
Are New York City Housing Providers Ready for the Fair Chance for Housing Act?
10 minute readUS Supreme Court Justices Pass on Landlord Challenge to NY Rent Stabilization
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Foreign-Company Lobbyists Would Need to Register Under Proposed DOJ Regulation
- 2'Fancy Dress': ERISA Claim Accuses Plan Administrator and Cigna Affiliates of Co-Pay Maximizer Scheme
- 3The American Lawyer's Top Stories of 2024
- 4Semiconductor Component Maker Accused of Deceiving Investors About Market Downturn, Export Curbs
- 5Zuckerman Spaeder Gets Ready to Move Offices in DC, Deploy AI Tools in 2025
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