|

Landlord-Tenant—Holdover Summary Eviction Proceeding Dismissed—Respondent Rented One Room In Handyman's Apartment, But Owner Failed to Name the Handyman as a Necessary Party

An owner alleged that the respondent had been granted a license to live in a basement apartment (apartment) by the superintendent, or in the alternative that the respondent is a squatter. The owner asserted that it had “revoked any permission that respondent may have had to occupy the apartment.” The respondent moved to dismiss the petition, based on the owner's “lack of standing and failure to name a necessary party.” The owner cross-moved to amend the petition to reflect that the owner was not seeking possession of the entire apartment, but only of one bedroom in the apartment.

The owner employed, inter alia, a superintendent and a handyman. The apartment was “designated for the use of a building employee.” The handyman currently lives in the apartment and has done so for more than ten years. The handyman does not pay any rent. He is paid approximately $400 per week for his services. The respondent lives in one room of the apartment and has done so for more than 10 years. The respondent pays the superintendent $360 per month for the room.