Landlords Sue Over Cuomo's Order Extending Eviction Moratorium During Pandemic
A group of landlords in Westchester County on Thursday sued New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo over his executive order extending a moratorium on evictions during the COVID-19 crisis, saying the measure violated their contract and due process rights and amounted to an improper taking of their property under the U.S. Constitution.
May 28, 2020 at 04:57 PM
4 minute read
A group of landlords in Westchester County on Thursday sued New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo over his executive order extending a moratorium on evictions during the COVID-19 crisis, saying the measure violated their contract and due process rights and amounted to an improper taking of their property under the U.S. Constitution.
The lawsuit, filed in White Plains federal court, seeks to nullify two provisions of the May 7 order, which prohibit landlords from pursuing eviction proceedings through Aug. 19 and give renters the option to put their security deposit toward their rent payment.
"In doing so, the order has given carte blanche to tenants to withhold rent without repercussion," attorney Mark A. Guterman of Lehrman, Lehrman & Guterman wrote in the 14-page complaint.
"Plaintiffs and all similarly situated landlords are precluded from asserting their rights and obtaining relief to protect their property, all the while remaining obligated to pay all of their own carrying costs and other expenses, including taxes to the various governmental divisions of New York State," the filing said.
The lawsuit comes as renters across the state are feeling the squeeze from the COVID-19 pandemic, which has led to widespread shutdowns and caused an unprecedented increase in unemployment claims. According to a recent survey by the real estate group PropertyNest, 37% of New York City renters said they would be unable to make rent in June, a figure that had more than doubled from the month of May.
Cuomo's order built on a similar measure in March that barred all commercial and residential evictions through June. It did not cancel rent payments altogether, and tenants are still responsible for making up any missed payments to their landlord.
The new order, however, extended the moratorium another two months for renters who qualified for unemployment benefits or are unable to pay rent due to the pandemic. Under the order, landlords are also required to apply tenants' security deposits to unpaid rent at the request of renters, though the deposits must be repaid in increments starting 90 days after their usage.
In Thursday's filing, the landlords said the order allowed renters to "unilaterally" violate leases without their consent and prevented them from using security deposits to recover for damages to their property.
The plaintiffs said they had all signed one-year leases with tenants and relied on the rents as the "sole source" of income.
While the landlords acknowledged that the order was meant to prevent struggling renters from being evicted, that goal could have been achieved through "less intrusive" actions, such as permitting courts to hear each individual case of non-payment on its merits or providing tenants the means to afford their rent during the crisis.
The order, they said, "creates a palpable and immediate threat to plaintiffs' ability to maintain their ownership interest in their properties and comply with plaintiffs' own contractual and statutory obligations by threatening the ongoing stream of rent."
The governor's press office did not respond Thursday to a request for comment.
The case, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, is captioned Elmsford Apartment Associates v. Cuomo.
READ MORE:
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 AllMall of America Dealt Another Blow in Quest to End $10-Per-Year Lease With Sears
3 minute readBinding a Successor Town Board; Default on Stipulation of Settlement: This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest
Top Real Estate Broker Brothers Facing Federal Sex Crimes Charges
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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