[*1]
WRG Acquisition XIII, LLC v Dalton
2014 NY Slip Op 50479(U) [43 Misc 3d 127(A)]
Decided on March 17, 2014
Appellate Term, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.


Decided on March 17, 2014
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

PRESENT: : NICOLAI, P.J., IANNACCI and MARANO, JJ
.

WRG Acquisition XIII, LLC, Appellant,

against

Robert A. Dalton, Respondent, -and- "JOHN DOE" and "JANE DOE," Undertenants.


Appeal from an order of the District Court of Nassau County, First District (Scott Fairgrieve, J.; op 36 Misc 3d 1222[A], 2012 NY Slip Op 51431[U]), dated August 1, 2012. The order granted tenant's motion to dismiss the petition in a holdover summary proceeding.


ORDERED that the order is reversed, without costs, and tenant's motion to dismiss the petition is denied.

Landlord commenced this holdover summary proceeding, alleging that tenant had breached a substantial obligation of his tenancy (see Emergency Tenant Protection Regulations [9 NYCRR] § 2504.2 [a]) and had committed a nuisance (see Emergency Tenant Protection Regulations [9 NYCRR] § 2504.2 [b]). Tenant moved to dismiss the petition on the sole ground that the notice to cure was deficient with respect to the cause of action for nuisance. The District Court granted tenant's motion.

Pursuant to Emergency Tenant Protection Regulations (9 NYCRR) § 2504.2 (b), nuisance is a specifically delineated ground for terminating a tenancy, but a notice to cure is a prerequisite to the commencement of a proceeding to recover possession on that ground (9 NYCRR § 2504.1 [d] [1] [i]). The notice to cure must state the wrongful act or omission of the tenant and the facts necessary to establish the existence of the wrongful act or omission (id.). Here, we find that the allegations in the notice to cure regarding the foul odors continuously emanating from the apartment satisfied this requirement.

Accordingly, the order is reversed and tenant's motion to dismiss the petition is denied.

Nicolai, P.J., Iannacci and Marano, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: March 17, 2014