Until recently, courts in non-primary residence holdover proceedings turned a blind eye in those instances where tenants previously made statements or representations in their tax returns—under penalty of perjury—that directly contradicted their claims of primary residence. That all changed pursuant to the First Department’s July 7, 2015 ruling in Ansonia Assoc. Partnership v. Unwin,1 where the court ruled that a tenant who claimed in her tax returns that she used her apartment solely for business purposes would be estopped from claiming in a non-primary residence holdover proceeding that she actually lived in the apartment.
Background
Pursuant to L 1971, ch 373, the New York State Legislature amended the various rent regulatory statutes to exclude from coverage apartments not occupied as the tenant’s primary residence. In his memorandum of support of Chapter 373, Governor Nelson Rockefeller stated:
This content has been archived.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]
