Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Oymin Chin, J.), entered October 20, 2004. The order denied tenant's motion to hold landlord in contempt of a so-ordered stipulation dated August 11, 2003.

Order unanimously affirmed without costs.

In this nonpayment proceeding, landlord and tenant entered into a stipulation of settlement which was so ordered by the court. Pursuant to said stipulation, landlord was to inspect and make repairs "as legally required" of those complaints made by tenant in her answer. The stipulation further provided that in the event landlord defaulted under the stipulation by failing to inspect and make repairs, tenant's remedy was to restore the matter to the calendar for the appropriate relief. After landlord allegedly defaulted by failing to make all repairs, tenant moved to hold landlord in contempt of the so-ordered stipulation. The mandate of the court that landlord "inspect and repair as legally required" the complaints listed in tenant's answer was not sufficiently specific and unequivocal to support a finding of contempt (see Pereira v Pereira, 35 NY2d 301, 308 [1974]; Kuenen v Kuenen, 122 AD2d 616 [1986]). [*2]
Decision Date: November 07, 2005