Dale Robert Javino, appellant pro se. Philip J. Iacono, respondent pro se (no brief filed).

Appeal, on the ground of inadequacy, from a final judgment of the District Court of Suffolk County, Fifth District (Stephen L. Ukeiley, J.), entered May 4, 2023. The final judgment, insofar as appealed from, entered upon tenant's failure to appear or answer the petition, upon awarding landlord possession, awarded landlord the principal sum of $3,000 in a holdover summary proceeding.

ORDERED that the final judgment, insofar as appealed from, is modified by increasing the amount awarded to landlord to the principal sum of $27,000; as so modified, the final judgment, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed, without costs.

Landlord commenced this holdover proceeding in March 2023 and, in addition to seeking to recover possession, sought rent arrears for July 2022 through March 2023, for a total of $27,000. A final judgment was entered May 4, 2023, upon tenant's failure to appear or answer the petition, awarding landlord possession and $3,000, representing rent arrears for the month of March 2023 only. The District Court found that landlord's claim for rent arrears for July 2022 through February 2023 was barred by the doctrine of res judicata due to the outcome of two earlier nonpayment proceedings, which were dismissed based upon defective predicate notices. Landlord appeals, arguing that he is entitled to recover the rent arrears from July 2022 through February 2023.

"Under the doctrine of res judicata, a final adjudication of a claim on the merits precludes relitigation of that claim and all claims arising out of the same transaction or series of transactions by a party or those in privity with a party" (Ciraldo v JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., 140 AD3d 912, 913 [2016]). "The rationale underlying this principle is that a party who has been given a full and fair opportunity to litigate a claim should not be allowed to do so again" (Matter of Hunter, 4 NY3d 260, 269 [2005]). Because the District Court dismissed the petitions in the prior nonpayment proceedings on the ground that landlord had failed to provide proper predicate notices prior to commencing those proceedings, the prior claims to recover the arrears were not [*2]determined on the merits. Thus, landlord's current claim for arrears is not barred by res judicata and, upon awarding landlord a default final judgment of possession, the District Court should have awarded landlord arrears totaling $27,000.

Accordingly, the final judgment, insofar as appealed from, is modified by increasing the amount awarded to landlord to the principal sum of $27,000.

McCORMACK and WALSH, JJ., concur.

GARGUILO, P.J., taking no part.