all traversable allegations in the opposing party's pleading. Courts have consistently held that
once [*6]a pleading has been stricken pursuant to CPLR 3126, the
path for a summary judgment motion has been laid [Smith v. Imagery Media LLC 23
Misc 3d 1119(A), 2009 NY Slip Op 50837(U)(granting motion for summary judgment after
answer had been stricken for discovery defaults); Ziskin Law Firm LLP v. Bi-County Electric Corp., 43 AD3d 1158
(summary judgment properly awarded after answer had been stricken pursuant to CPLR 3126
and upon showing of prima facie case); AWL Industries Inc. v. QBE Insurance Corp., 65 AD3d 904
(court need not determine whether there was a triable issue of fact after defendant's answer
had been stricken petitioner was entitled to judgment).
Petitioner has made a prime facie showing of entitlement to summary
judgment with respect to the underlying owners' use holdover proceeding. Petitioner purchased
the subject building in 2005, and is the owner pursuant to a recorded deed (Exhibit I to moving
papers). Respondent is in possession and the terms of his tenancy are governed by a written lease
dated August 21, 2011 for a period through and including March 31, 2003. Respondent's lease
was most recently renewed in writing on December 6, 2006 for a period of two years, through
and including January 6, 2009.
The subject building is a two family home. Mr. Mickens asserts his occupancy of the
Subject Premises commenced on or about 1984. The building is not a multiple dwelling, and the
Subject premises are not subject to rent regulation, although the 2001 Stipulation provides that
Respondent's tenancy is to be governed by the terms applicable to a rent regulated tenant.
On or about October 3, 2008, Petitioner served Respondent with a combined