Do Tenants Have To Pay if They Want To Stay?
The New York real estate industry has seen more legislative reform within the past five years than ever before. With all the recent protection provided to tenants, the question is now raised—can a landlord require a tenant to pay rent and/or use and occupancy during the pendency of a case? The answer is simply, “Yes.”
February 03, 2025 at 04:40 PM
10 minute read
The New York real estate industry has seen more legislative reform within the past five years than ever before. With all the recent protection provided to tenants, the question is now raised—can a landlord require a tenant to pay rent and/or use and occupancy during the pendency of a case?
The answer is simply, “Yes.” In fact, if a landlord obtains an order in Supreme Court compelling the tenant to pay use and occupancy, and the tenant fails to pay use and occupancy pursuant to that court order, the landlord’s legal remedy is for immediate possession of the subject premises. Bottom line—if the tenant wants to stay, the tenant must pay.
Use and occupancy is a legal remedy available to landlords at equity awarded by the court as monetary consideration for the tenant’s using and occupying of the premises to be paid to the landlord during the adjudication of dispute in court. Use and occupancy can be awarded irrespective of whether or not a tenant is holding over past the expiration of the lease.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 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
Tortious Interference With a Contract; Retaliatory Eviction Defense; Illegal Lockout: This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest
This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest: Constructive Trust Claim; Succession Rights; Tenant ‘Blacklisting Law’
Binding a Successor Town Board; Default on Stipulation of Settlement: This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest
Trending Stories
- 1Crypto Hacker’s $65 Million Scam Ends in Indictment
- 2Trump's Inspectors General Purge Could Make Policy Changes Easier, Observers Say
- 3Supporting Our Supreme Court Justices in the Guardianship Part
- 4'Erroneous Rulings'?: Wilmer Asks 4th Circuit to Overturn Mosby's Criminal Convictions
- 5Judge Orders Acquittal of Ex-Prosecutor on 1 of 2 Counts in Misconduct Trial Over Ahmaud Arbery Case
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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
