The petitioner CLAC America II, Inc. moves, pursuant to RPAPL Section 745, for an order of use and occupancy ("U & O") relating to the subject premises and, pursuant to New York City Civil Court Act Section 110, for an order enjoining the short-term renting of the subject premises for periods less than 30 days. The motion is granted.

As an initial matter, petitioner is entitled to U & O pursuant to RPAPL 745(2) during the pendency of these proceedings, which were commenced in October 2014. The argument that litigation regarding a dispute involving the subject premises, which consists of an entire building rented to respondent Sky Worldwide LLC pursuant to a net lease, should be handled in housing court is completely without merit.^[FN1] All of the cases relied upon by respondent in support of its assertion of a lack of subject matter jurisdiction are readily distinguishable. This Court has jurisdiction over a commercial dispute involving the rental of a building to a venture that is in the business of renting apartments. In this regard, the Court notes that respondent is not using any [*2]part of the premises for its own personal residence. Respondent is directed to pay U & O in the amount of $86,520 within five days and contemporaneously provide proof of same to the Court and opposing counsel. Upon a failure to make said payment, a judgment of possession and money judgment will be entered against respondent.

Next, the Court also directs that respondent is not to rent any units located in the subject premises for illegal short-term occupancy. Petitioner has attached current listings for units in the building at $449 per night. There have apparently been five violations issued by New York City relating to the alleged running of the subject premises as an illegal hotel. The Court notes that short-term rentals not only violate the law, but, as a practical matter, constitute a threat to public safety. In reaching this result, the Court follows the highly persuasive authority articulated in Brookford LLC v. Penraat, 47 Misc 3d 723 (Sup. Ct., NY County 2014). Accordingly, it is also ordered that respondent is enjoined from advertising or renting apartments/units in the subject premises to tourists or other visitors for stays of less than 30 days, and otherwise operating an illegal hotel in violation of the law. In reaching this decision, the Court notes that petitioner has demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits, potential irreparable harm to petitioner, and that a balancing of the equities favors granting an injunction in favor of petitioner.

This constitutes the decision and order of this Court.