Judge Arlene Hahn
Landlord sought to recover nearly $47,000 allegedly due by tenant Young in this summary nonpayment action. Young raised defenses, including laches. The court stated the only issues to be determined at trial were if landlord was barred from obtaining a possessory judgment for any, or all, amounts claimed under the doctrine of laches. It found in the affirmative stating landlord failed to commence the proceeding for 42 months after tenant’s default in paying her rent. The court rejected landlord’s excuse that its delay was caused by prior counsel, who was instructed to commence a nonpayment proceeding against tenant, stating landlord failed to practice due diligence in confirming its attorneys did what they were hired to do. Further, it stated landlord’s delay in commencing this proceeding was not vitiated by it’s former counsel’s inaction, noting it had a remedy at law against those attorneys. The court concluded the significant delays caused rental arrears to accumulate to the point where it was nearly impossible for tenant to pay, thus permitting landlord to recover at this junction was unquestionably prejudicial to Young. Hence, Young established a defense of laches, awarding landlord a final judgment of possession of $9,062.54.
