2009 NY Slip Op 52324

deposit is held as security to cover costs for repairs and/or past due rent or other fees imposed by
the lease terms - Paragraph 18 specifically deals with the number of pets that may be kept on the
premises and a $150 non-refundable pet deposit was imposed for each animal to cover any
repairs and/or cleaning related to keeping pets on the premises.

It is clear that the pet deposit is not collected as part of the general security deposit
on the lease of the premises but rather is specifically tailored to cover any consequences as a
result of having animals living in the apartment. The Court finds that the non-refundable deposit
of $150 is a liquidated damage to cover any wear and tear of whatsoever kind and nature arising
from having pets in the premises.

The Court finds that the $850 security deposit being subject to forfeiture under paragraph 34
"if the lease is terminated" represents in the Court's opinion not a "liquidated" damages, but
rather, a penalty based on the decision in LeRoy v Sayers.

In this lease the landlord as allowed under its terms can recover any past due rent as well as
rent due on the balance of the term in the event the tenant either defaults and/or abandons the
leasehold as provided under the lease terms at paragraphs 21 and 23 of the lease contract
(Holy Properties v Cole Products [supra ]). These terms provide the landlord with a
complete remedy for any financial loss arising from the tenant's failure to meet the rent
obligations of this lease contract. Taken together with the non-refundable pet deposit the Court
finds the landlord has adequate remedies against the tenant to recover any losses arising from a
breach of this agreement.

In LeRoy the Court stated: