Zola v. Havivi
Opinion of the Court
The landlord has instituted this holdover proceeding against the tenant to obtain possession of the premises. It is conceded that the premises are not subject to the emergency housing rent control laws, and are, therefore, decontrolled. The parties hereto had entered into a written lease dated October 23, 1950 for a term commencing November 1, 1950 and expiring on October 30, 1953. Thereafter, on November 10, 1953, the parties entered into another written lease for a period commencing December 1, 1953 and expiring May 31,1955. There is no renewal provision in the lease. Paragraph “ 21 ” of said lease provides: “ Upon the expiration or other termination of the term of this lease, Tenant shall quit and surrender to Landlord the demised premises ”.
Upon the expiration of the original term, the landlord was required to elect to treat the tenant as a trespasser, a month-to-month tenant or as a holdover tenant for one year. Since nothing was done or said by the landlord on the expiration of the lease, it is the opinion of this court that the tenant became a holdover tenant from year to year, and that since several months have elapsed since May 31, 1958, the tenant is a holdover tenant for an additional year until May 31, 1959. In short, when an expired lease covers a term of over one year, the duration of the holding over will be for units of one year, if the conduct of the landlord indicates an election to treat the tenant as a holdover. (Kennedy v. City of New York, 196 N. Y. 19; Watterman v. Falk, 11 Misc 2d 1074; Syndicate Bldg. Corp. v. Hide Trading Corp., 12 Misc 2d 134.)
This proceeding is therefore premature and must be dismissed.
Final order for the tenant.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.