a prima facie cause of action for breach of a substantial obligation of the tenancy based
on chronic nonpayment of the rent (see Rent Stabilization Code [9 NYCRR]
§ 2524.3[a]). In the alternative, she seeks partial summary judgment dismissing that
part of the Petition which asserts untimely predicate claims barred by the six-year
applicable Statute of Limitations of CPLR 213(2), or for permission to file a late Answer
pursuant to CPLR 3025(b). In support of her Motion, Tenant argues that Landlord
cannot rely on nonpayment proceedings commenced against her over six years prior to
this proceeding, nor on two of the listed proceedings which are unrelated and do not
involve the subject Premises or Tenant. In any event, the three timely legal proceedings
which could be relied upon by Landlord were either settled by stipulations containing
repair and habitability issues or concluded after discontinuances. Hence, Tenant asserts
that Landlord cannot characterize her as chronically delinquent and the Petition should
be dismissed.
In opposition, Landlord moves, by Notice of Motion dated March 31, 2014, for leave
to amend the defects in the "Notice to Cure" which incorrectly list Index numbers of two
previous proceedings, and asserting that it mistakenly transposed one digit of the Index
numbers and should be allowed to amend those "minor defects." Landlord additionally
argues that its Predicate Notice sufficiently states a cause of action for a breach of a
substantial lease obligation and that triable issues of fact exist as to the basis for this
holdover proceeding. This Court disagrees.
"A history of repeated nonpayment proceedings brought to collect chronically late
rental payments supports an eviction proceeding on the ground that the tenant has