The following e-filed documents, listed on NYSCEF as document number 18 (Motion Seq. # 003) were read on this Notice of Motion filed by the Petitioner seeking to re-execute the previously issued warrant of eviction

Petitioner filed the instant Notice of Motion seeking to restore the instant action to the court calendar, and for an order granting Petitioner leave to re-execute upon the warrant of eviction. Respondent did not oppose Petitioner's application. The Court determines Petitioner's application on default.

Petitioner seeks an order permitting it to re-execute upon the warrant of eviction. Petitioner indicates that the parties appeared on March 17, 2025 on Respondent's Order to Show Cause (Motion Seq. # 002) seeking to "vacate the judgment based upon failure to comply with the stipulation". On March 17, 2025, the parties entered into a so-ordered Stipulation of Settlement ("Stipulation") wherein the parties agreed to stay the warrant of eviction provided that the Respondent made the monthly payments in accordance with said Stipulation. Petitioner states that unbeknownst to the affirmant, Respondent had been legally evicted from the subject [*2]premises and "erroneously/illegally restored to possession of the parking space." Petitioner asserts that Respondent has failed to comply with the terms of the most recent Stipulation, and Petitioner learned that it could not execute upon its warrant of eviction because it had had already been executed upon. Petitioner seeks to re-execute upon the warrant of eviction based upon Respondent's failure to comply with the terms of the Stipulation.

Petitioner's application seeking an order permitting it to re-execute upon a warrant of eviction which was previously executed upon is denied in its entirety. It is well-settled that "[o]nce a warrant of eviction has been executed, the proceeding [is] no longer pending and the court [is] divested of jurisdiction to hear petitioner's motion" (see Halsey Homes Corp. v Prince-Bowden, 69 Misc 3d 137[A] [App Term, 2020]). It is undisputed based upon the record presented that Respondent's eviction was legally executed, and Petitioner represents that the eviction was effectuated prior to the stay of execution granted in the parties' Stipulation. This Court does not find Petitioner's inadvertent mistake in restoring Respondent to possession post-eviction a compelling reason to warrant re-execution of the warrant of eviction. Even if the Respondent "illegally" resumed possession of the parking space post-eviction, "the marshal cannot re-execute the warrant of eviction and re-evict [her]" (see Sweet v Sanella, 46 AD2d 688 [2d Dept 1974]). As such, Petitioner's application seeking leave of court to re-execute upon the warrant of eviction is denied in its entirety.

Based upon the foregoing, Petitioner's application seeking to restore the matter to the court calendar is denied.

In light of the foregoing, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Petitioner's Notice of Motion (Motion Seq. # 003) seeking to restore the matter to the court calendar and for leave of court to re-execute the warrant of eviction is denied in its entirety in accordance with the Court's findings hereinabove; and it is further

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Petitioner shall serve a copy of this Decision and Order with Notice of Entry upon Respondent within five (5) calendar days of the date of the entry of this Decision and Order by the Clerk.

This shall constitute the decision and order of the Court.