In 520 Tinton, L.P. v. Harlem United, 2020 WL 3477757 (N.Y. Civ. Ct. 2020), the court addressed an obscure portion of the HSTPA, embodied in the Part J amendments thereto. These amendments granted protection from non-primary residence evictions to not-for-profit entities that provide “scatter site” housing for the homeless. This article will explore whether the Part J amendments are constitutional. There is much to suggest that they are not.
Non-Primary Residence
ETPA § 5(a)(11) provides in relevant part that New York City may not declare a housing emergency with respect to “housing accommodations which are not occupied by the tenant, not including subtenants or occupants, as his or her primary residence, as determined by a court of competent jurisdiction.” This language reflects the state’s policy that the city’s housing crisis should not be “‘exacerbated by tenants using their rent-controlled and rent-stabilized apartments only occasionally.’” Cox v J.D. Realty, 217 AD2d 179, 185 (1st Dept 1995).
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]