Civil Court of the City of New York, Richmond County, July 6, 2022

Nicholas M. Moccia, Staten Island, for plaintiff.

Plaintiff Mohamed Azzat moves this court for an order granting him a default judgment against defendants Ciara Abudayyeh and Anthony Weber for their failure to answer the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3215. The court hereby denies plaintiff's motion. [*2]

Plaintiff commenced this action by filing a summons and complaint on February 23, 2022. Plaintiff represents that he owns the premises located at 189 Mayberry Promenade, Basement Unit, Staten Island, NY 10312 (subject premises), which are a one family dwelling. According to the plaintiff, the defendants unlawfully reside at the subject premises and the subject premises "constitutes a second, illegal dwelling unit in Subject Premises." In the summons and complaint, plaintiff alleges that "[d]efendants' continued use and occupancy of the basement of the Subject Premises is illegal" and that plaintiff elects to recover possession pursuant to article 6 of the Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law. Plaintiff further contends that defendants "have not paid any rent for over 3 years" and that this court has subject matter jurisdiction over this ejectment proceeding since the "tax assessed value of the Subject Premises is $27,864.00."

Plaintiff represents that the defendants were served with the summons and complaint pursuant to CPLR 308 (4) on March 11, 2022, at the subject premises and that service was complete pursuant to the statute on March 31, 2022, which is 10 days after the affidavit of service was filed with this court on March 21, 2022. Plaintiff further mailed the summons and complaint to each defendant pursuant to CPLR 3215 (g) on May 3, 2022. Plaintiff provides affidavits of service in support of his representations with respect to service. Based upon defendants' failure to answer or otherwise appear in this action, the plaintiff requests that the court enter a default judgment against the defendants.{**76 Misc 3d at 335}

Pursuant to New York City Civil Court Act § 203 (j), this court has jurisdiction over an action of ejectment where the assessed valuation of the real property does not exceed $25,000 when the action is commenced. Despite plaintiff's contentions regarding this court's jurisdiction, the court finds that it does not have jurisdiction over this matter. Effective January 1, 2022, article VI, § 15 of the New York State Constitution was amended to expand the jurisdiction of this court. Prior to its amendment, article VI, § 15 (b) of the New York State Constitution previously read:

"The court of city-wide civil jurisdiction of the city of New York shall have jurisdiction over the following classes of actions and proceedings which shall be originated in such court in the manner provided by law: actions and proceedings for the recovery of money, actions and proceedings for the recovery of chattels and actions and proceedings for the foreclosure of mechanics liens and liens on personal property where the amount sought to be recovered or the value of the property does not exceed twenty-five thousand dollars exclusive of interest and costs, or such smaller amount as may be fixed by law; over summary proceedings to recover possession of real property and to remove tenants therefrom and over such other actions and proceedings, not within the exclusive jurisdiction of the supreme court, as may be provided by law. The court of city-wide civil jurisdiction shall further exercise such equity jurisdiction as may be provided by law and its jurisdiction to enter judgment upon a counterclaim for the recovery of money only shall be unlimited." (Emphasis added.)

Pursuant to the amendment made effective on January 1, 2022, the New York State [*3]Constitution, article VI, § 15 (b) currently reads:

"The court of city-wide civil jurisdiction of the city of New York shall have jurisdiction over the following classes of actions and proceedings which shall be originated in such court in the manner provided by law: actions and proceedings for the recovery of money, actions and proceedings for the recovery of chattels and actions and proceedings for the foreclosure of mechanics liens and liens on {**76 Misc 3d at 336}personal property where the amount sought to be recovered or the value of the property does not exceed fifty thousand dollars exclusive of interest and costs, or such smaller amount as may be fixed by law; over summary proceedings to recover possession of real property and to remove tenants therefrom and over such other actions and proceedings, not within the exclusive jurisdiction of the supreme court, as may be provided by law. The court of city-wide civil jurisdiction shall further exercise such equity jurisdiction as may be provided by law and its jurisdiction to enter judgment upon a counterclaim for the recovery of money only shall be unlimited." (Emphasis added.)

Prior to its approval by the voters at the general election held on November 2, 2021, the amendment, known as 2021 NY Assembly Bill A3109, 2021 NY Senate Bill S514, was a concurrent resolution of the Senate and Assembly to amend section 15 of article VI of the New York State Constitution with respect to the New York City Civil Court. The bill's purpose was to "increase the jurisdiction of New York City Civil Court for actions and proceedings in the recovery of money or property worth no more than twenty-five thousand dollars to no more than fifty thousand dollars." (Senate Introducer's Mem in Support of 2021 NY Senate Bill S514.)

Despite the intent of the legislature to increase the jurisdiction of this court to adjudicate over proceedings for recovery of money or property of no more than $50,000, such legislative intent is currently being held in abeyance. While article VI, § 15 of the New York State Constitution was amended to increase the jurisdiction of this court from $25,000 to $50,000, such jurisdiction is limited by the following provision: "or such smaller amount as may be fixed by law." (NY Const, art VI, § 15 [b].) As previously stated, CCA 203 (j) provides that the Civil Court of the City of New York shall have jurisdiction over "an action of ejectment where the assessed valuation of the real property does not exceed $25,000 at the time the action is commenced." Since CCA 203 (j) has not been amended to increase the jurisdiction of this court in accordance with the legislative intent underlying the amendment recently made to article VI, § 15 of the New York State Constitution, this court's jurisdiction remains limited to ejectment actions for property valued at no more than $25,000. Since plaintiff has demonstrated prima facie that the tax assessed value of the subject{**76 Misc 3d at 337} premises is $27,864, this court currently lacks jurisdiction over the matter pursuant to CCA 203.

While this court's jurisdiction is currently restricted to ejectment actions for property valued at no more than $25,000, the court's jurisdiction may soon be expanded. In May 2022, 2022 NY Assembly Bill A10461, 2022 NY Senate Bill S9377 (hereinafter S9377) was introduced, which is "[a]n act to amend the New York city civil court act, in relation to monetary jurisdictional limits." (Senate Introducer's Mem in Support of 2022 NY Senate Bill S9377.) Under S9377, CCA 203 (j) would be amended to read that the Civil Court of the City of New York shall have jurisdiction over "[a]n action of ejectment where the assessed valuation of the real property does [*4]not exceed $50,000 at the time the action is commenced" (emphasis added). S9377 further states that when the act takes effect, it "shall take effect immediately and shall be deemed to have been in full force and effect on or after January 1, 2022." As of the date of this decision, S9377 was passed by the Senate and the Assembly, but has not been delivered to, nor signed by, the Governor of the State of New York. Since S9377 has not been enacted, this court's jurisdiction has not been expanded to adjudicate ejectment matters for property valued up to $50,000.

The court recognizes that this matter is a unique circumstance, as this action would come into this court's jurisdiction upon the enactment of S9377, namely since S9377 is retroactive and would be deemed effective January 1, 2022. However, unless S9377 is enacted into law, the Civil Court of the City of New York remains limited to the $25,000 jurisdictional "cap" found in CCA 203. Since plaintiff has demonstrated prima facie that the tax assessed value of the subject premises is $27,864, this court currently lacks jurisdiction over the matter pursuant to CCA 203 and the action must be dismissed.

Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that plaintiff's motion is hereby denied; and it is ordered that the plaintiff's complaint is dismissed without prejudice.