hammering and other construction. Forest Hill v. Schimmel, supra, holds in relevant part
that where there are conditions which frustrate the reasonably intended use of a Garden
Apartment's outdoor common area the tenant is entitled to a rent abatement.
For purposes of warranty of habitability the Court finds Tenant met her burden. The
Court credits her testimony, which includes vibrations during jack hammering, mud,
uncontroverted testimony regarding porta potty odor, and unpleasantries. Landlord claims Tenant
renewed her lease subject to the construction because of his early conversation with Tenant.
However any conversation regarding "future" construction with Tenant was vague, not at all
intended to inform her of legal consequences and not sufficient notice under the law. In addition
Tenant's photographs speak for themselves regarding diminution of value. Accordingly the Court
finds the Tenant is entitled to a 20% rent abatement from the last week in February 2011.
Tenant's claims for other rent abatements are dismissed. In order to hold a landlord
responsible for repairs pursuant to the warranty of habitability a tenant must give notice to the
landlord Jangla Realty Co v. Gravagna, 112 Misc 2d 642 (1981). "Mr. A" credibly
testified that he repaired the property when needed as evidenced by repair bills. He credibly
testified he was unaware of any other needed repairs until the current litigation commenced.
Tenant who submitted letters, texts, an email, numerous photos and other exhibits failed to
submit letters to the landlord regarding a broken refrigerator and lights or cracked/leaking
ceiling. "Mr. A" credibly testified he [*5]timely removed debris
from fallen trees. The Court finds no further rent abatement is merited.
Affirmative Defenses and
Counterclaims