BELLSTELL 140 E. v LAYTON [180 Misc 2d 25] 25
[687 NYS2d 536]
Bellstell 140 East 56th Street, L. L. C., Petitioner, v Jean
Layton et al., Respondents.
Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County, February 5, 1999
HEADNOTE
Landlord and Tenant — Summary Proceedings — Suciency of
Predicate Notices for Eviction Based on Illegal Sublet
The notice to cure and notice of termination served upon respondent ten-
ant to support an eviction proceeding based on an illegal sublet, which allege
that respondent no longer resides at the premises and has sublet or assigned
the premises to a named individual without the landlord's permission, are
factually sucient, notwithstanding that they failed to specify the address of
the prime tenant's new primary residence. To succeed on an illegal sublet
claim, petitioner landlord need only prove that the respondent prime tenant
is no longer residing at the subject premises and that the prime tenant
sublet the premises to another without the landlord's consent. Inasmuch as
the address of the new primary residence is not a ‘‘fact[ ] necessary to estab-
lish the existence of’’ an illegal sublet claim (Rent Stabilization Code [9
NYCRR] § 2524.2 [b]), the address need not be alleged in the predicate no-
tices.
TOTAL CLIENT-SERVICE LIBRARYL REFERENCES
By the Publisher’s Editorial Sta
Am Jur 2d, Landlord and Tenant, §§ 24, 289, 648, 1070.
Carmody-Wait 2d, Summary Proceedings to Recover Pos-
session of Real Property §§ 90:32, 90:54.
9 NYCRR 2524.2 (b).
NY Jur 2d, Landlord and Tenant, §§ 468, 490; Real Prop-
erty—Possessory and Related Actions, § 32.
NY Real Prop Serv, §§ 74:224, 79:7–79:10, 79:24.
ANNOTATION REFERENCE
See ALR Index under Ejectment, Eviction, and Ouster;
Landlord and Tenant.
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL