---

Posted by Mark Smith on September 14, 1999 at 23:44:15:

In Reply to: Court Allows Multiple Roommates Under Standard Form Lease posted by Mark Smith on September 14, 1999 at 22:51:29:

As quoted, below, from the decision, the court acknowledged that if the lease limited the tenant to having only one roommate (occupant), as permitted by RPL §235-f, such a provision probably could be enforced:

"Thus, if the lease expressly limited the number of "occupants" as defined by R.P.L. §235-f(1)(b) to one, such a clause ought to be enforceable under §235-f(3) if the occupancy limitation is otherwise "reasonable." Capital Holding Co. v. Stavrolakes, 242 A.D.2d at 244. See 430 Realty Co. v. Baird, N.Y.L.J., May 14, 1997, at 29 (Civ. Ct. N.Y. Co.).

Here, however, the lease does not contain any such express limit. While limiting the occupants to one may be permissible consistent with R.P.L. §235-f, a greater number is equally "in accordance with" the entire statute. See 61 Jane Street Assoc. v. Kroll, 102 A.D.2d 751, 753 (1st Dep't 1984). Particularly since the lease in this case provides for "occupants," not "an occupant" or "one occupant," the provision must be interpreted to permit more than one occupant."

http://www.nylj.com/decisions/99/09/091599b5.htm

or click on the link below

• ROXBOROUGH APTS. CORP. v. BECKER

Follow Ups:

• Re: Quote From Decision: click on re-load! Anna 9/15/99 (1)
  • No, Anna, I Didn't Forget To Click On Reload Mark Smith 9/15/99 (0)

---

Note: Posting is disabled in all archives
Post a Followup

Name    : 
E-Mail  : 
Subject : 

Comments:
: As quoted, below, from the decision, the court acknowledged that if the lease limited the tenant to having only one roommate (occupant), as permitted by RPL §235-f, such a provision probably could be enforced:

: "Thus, if the lease expressly limited the number of "occupants" as defined by R.P.L. §235-f(1)(b) to one, such a clause ought to be enforceable under §235-f(3) if the occupancy limitation is otherwise "reasonable." Capital Holding Co. v. Stavrolakes, 242 A.D.2d at 244. See 430 Realty Co. v. Baird, N.Y.L.J., May 14, 1997, at 29 (Civ. Ct. N.Y. Co.). 

: Here, however, the lease does not contain any such express limit. While limiting the occupants to one may be permissible consistent with R.P.L. §235-f, a greater number is equally "in accordance with" the entire statute. See 61 Jane Street Assoc. v. Kroll, 102 A.D.2d 751, 753 (1st Dep't 1984). Particularly since the lease in this case provides for "occupants," not "an occupant" or "one occupant," the provision must be interpreted to permit more than one occupant."

: http://www.nylj.com/decisions/99/09/091599b5.htm

: or click on the link below


Optional Link URL:  
Link Title:         
Optional Image URL: 

---