The petitioner moves for an award of attorneys' fees following a final judgment of possession and warrant of eviction against the respondents in this holdover proceeding.

The respondents oppose the application for attorneys fees.

Petitioner commenced this holdover proceeding based upon respondents' chronic failure to pay rent due in a timely fashion as provided in the lease agreement. Respondents moved to dismiss the Notice of Petition and Petition for various reasons. By Decision and Order, dated April 12, 2010, the Court denied the motion. On April 19, 2010 the parties appeared in court. In light of the Court's decision not to dismiss the action, the respondents consented to entry of judgment in the amount fo $5,125.66 with a stay until April 30, 2010.

The parties August 22, 2000 lease agreement provides for the award of attorneys fees in any proceeding to enforce the terms of that agreement. Paragraph 13 provides in pertinent part "13. Tenant's Default. . .(d) if the Tenant is dispossessed, he must still pay the Landlord all rents due under this agreement plus all expenses that are incidental to dispossessing the Tenant, including reasonable attorneys's fees, plus all expenses that are incidental to re-renting the apartment." In accordance with the Court's directive, the petitioner's counsel has now submitted an affirmation in support of its application for attorneys fees.

In his application for attorneys' fees, petitioner's counsel affirms that petitioner's counsels are considered experts in the field of Landlord/Tenant law. Finger & Finger prosecutes hundreds of landlord-tenant cases and members of the firm appear in courts throughout Westchester and its surrounding counties each week and month. Counsel affirms that the his regular rate is $395.00 per hour. Counsel has included costs for court appearances, federal express mailings, motion preparation and drafting, copies, service of process, and notice of termination fees totaling $6,016.40. Counsel further anticipates that he will expend another 2 [*2]hours on post judgment work, thereby adding another $790.00 in legal fees. All together, counsel seeks a total of $6,806.40 in legal fees and costs plus the judgment in the amount of $5,125.66.

In opposition, the respondent's counsel argues that one of the respondent's is elderly and on a fixed income. Counsel argues that petitioner's counsel has misrepresented the outcome of the proceeding. She contends that a decision was not rendered in the petitioner's favor, rather the respondent-tenant consented to a judgment and warrant of eviction because she was relocating to another apartment. Accordingly, respondent's counsel maintains that the lease agreement does not provide for attorneys fees in this case, as the tenant was not dispossessed from the apartment but voluntarily vacated the premises. The Court disagrees. Respondent's counsel also opposes the amount of legal fees arguing that city courts, including Mount Vernon, routinely award landlords $225.00 in reasonable legal fees and costs for an ordinary landlord-tenant summary proceeding. Counsel argues that the bulk of petitioner's counsel's work consisted of preparing motion papers in opposition to respondent's motion to dismiss and that $4,059.00 in legal fees for preparing opposition papers is exorbitant. Respondent argues that petitioner's claim for 10.2 billable hours in preparing opposition papers is excessive, especially for counsels who consider themselves "experts in the field of Landlord-Tenant law." Counsel also disputes the Federal Express charges incurred for serving the motion papers twice since this was the result of petitioner-landlord's attorney's own error. Counsel also argues that the petitioner's $790.00 for "anticipated further expenditures" must be denied as it is unreasonable and speculative.

The fact that the respondent chose to vacate the premises is irrelevant. As the petitioner states in the reply affirmation, respondent moved to dismiss this proceeding. After the Court denied the motion, the respondent consented to vacating the premises and a judgment and warrant were granted against the respondents. Accordingly, the Court finds the respondents were dispossessed of the premises.

"It is long established that the proponent of an application for attorney's fees has the burden of proving the reasonable value of the services rendered (Sand v Lammers, 150 AD2d 355 (2d Dept. 1989)...The threshold issue of billable hours multiplied by hourly rate is only one of the factors to be considered by a Court. Additionally, a Court should review the character and extent of the services and the matter in which rendered; the difficulty of the case, the novelty of the issues involved; the attorney's standing, learning and reputation; the ability or experience necessary to handle the matter; the skill exercised on the matter; the results of the matter or benefit to the client, and the customary charges for similar services in the locality (Jordan v Freeman, 40 AD2d 656 (1st Dept. 1972)."

Based upon the above noted factors, the Court awards attorneys' fees to the petitioner in the amount of $2,000.00, payable by the respondents.

This constitutes the Decision and Order of the Court.

The Court considered the following papers on this motion: Petitioner's Affirmation in Support of Application for Legal Fees, dated May 10, 2010; Affirmation in Opposition, dated May 26, 2010; Exh. A-B; Reply Affirmation, dated June 1, 2010.

Dated:October 8, 2010

Mount Vernon, New York [*3]

__________________________________

HON. ADAM SEIDEN

Associate City Judge of Mount Vernon

To:Carl L. Finger, Esq.

Finger & Finger

Attorneys for Petitioner

158 Grand Street

White Plains, New York 10601

Jessica Strout, Esq.

Legal Services of the Hudson Valley

Attorneys for Respondent

30 South Broadway, 6th Floor

Yonkers, New York 10701