FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/27/2019 03:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/27/2019
`
`SUPREME
`COUNTY
`
`OF THE STATE
`COURT
`OF NEW YORK
`
`OF NEW YORK
`
`DARRELL
`
`MAYS
`
`and TARA MAYS,
`
`Index
`
`No.
`
`152230/2019
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`- against
`
`-
`
`JOHN
`ROBERTSHAW,
`the ROBERTSHAW
`June
`dated
`TRUST,
`ROBERTSHAW,
`
`as Trustee
`and
`individually
`CHARITABLE
`REMAINDER
`and ELIZABETH
`
`2016,
`
`22,
`
`of
`
`Defendants.
`
`____________-------------------------------
`
`MEMORANDUM
`DEFENDANTS'
`
`OF LAW IN SUPPORT
`MOTION
`TO DISMISS
`
`OF
`
`CKR LAW LLP
`Alan
`R. Arkin
`M. Blase
`Kristie
`1330 Avenue
`of
`14th
`Floor
`New York
`New York,
`Tel.:
`259-7300
`(212)
`Email:
`aarkin@ckrlaw.com
`kblase@ckrlaw.com
`
`the Americas
`
`10019
`
`for
`
`2016,
`
`Defendants
`and
`as Trustee
`Remainder
`Trust,
`and Elizabeth
`
`John
`
`of
`
`Robertshaw,
`the Robertshaw
`dated
`Robertshaw
`
`Attorneys
`
`individually
`Charitable
`June
`
`22,
`
`1 of 15
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/27/2019 03:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/27/2019
`
`TABLE
`
`OF CONTENTS
`
`TABLE
`
`OF AUTHORITIES
`
`.........................
`
`.......
`
`........................................1
`
`PRELIMINARY
`
`STATEMENT............
`
`........................
`
`2
`
`STATEMENT
`
`OF FACTS................................
`
`....................................
`
`..............2
`
`Standard
`
`on Motion
`
`to Dismiss
`
`.........................
`
`.......................
`
`.......................7
`
`ARGUMENT
`
`.........................................................................................8
`
`Plaintiff's
`
`Claims
`
`Fail
`
`Because
`
`They
`
`Took
`
`the Properties
`
`"As
`
`Is"
`
`in the
`
`Leases
`
`...............8
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`Claims
`
`Fail
`
`Because
`
`There
`
`Is No Infestation
`
`of
`
`the Premises
`
`............9
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`Fail
`
`of Warranty
`for Breach
`Claims
`Upon Which
`a Claim
`Relief
`to State
`
`of Habitability
`Can Be Granted
`
`and Quiet
`....
`
`Enjoyment
`........................10
`
`I.
`
`II.
`
`III.
`
`IV.
`
`Should
`The Court
`Defendants'
`with
`
`Award
`Response
`
`Defendants
`Plaintiffs'
`to
`
`Attorneys'
`
`Fees
`
`Incurred
`
`Complaint
`
`in Connection
`...
`
`..
`
`12
`
`...........12
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`.................................................................................
`
`2 of 15
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/27/2019 03:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/27/2019
`
`TABLE
`
`OF AUTHORITIES
`
`Cases
`
`Bd.
`
`of Managers
`148 A.D.3d
`
`Condo.
`of Saratoga
`51 N.Y.S.3d
`609,
`
`v. Shuminer,
`34 (1st Dep't
`
`2017).......................
`
`Dave
`
`Herstein
`4 N.Y.2d
`
`Co.
`
`v. Columbia
`149 N.E.2d
`
`117,
`
`Pictures
`328
`
`Corp.,
`
`(1958)
`
`..................................................
`
`9
`
`10
`
`Dolansky
`
`v. Frisillo,
`92 A.D.3d
`
`1286,
`
`939 N.Y.S.2d
`
`210
`
`(2012)........................................
`
`......6,
`
`7
`
`Goshen
`
`v. Mutual
`98 N.Y.2d
`
`Life
`
`314,
`
`Insurance
`746 N.Y.S.2d
`
`Company
`858
`
`of New York,
`(2002)............
`
`...............................
`
`5, 8
`
`Leon
`
`v. Martinez,
`84 N.Y.2d
`
`83,
`
`638 N.E.2d
`
`511
`
`(1994)...................
`
`................
`
`.......5
`
`Morning
`
`Light
`62 Misc.
`
`LLC v. Brown,
`Realty,
`87 N.Y.S.3d
`3d 274,
`
`450
`
`(City
`
`Ct. Albany
`
`County
`
`2018)..
`
`..................7
`
`Corp.
`
`cert
`
`Park W Mgmt.
`47 N.Y.2d
`
`v. Mitchell,
`391 N.E.2d
`
`316,
`
`1288
`
`(1979),
`
`denied
`
`444 U.S.
`
`992
`
`(1979)
`
`.....
`
`Schwartz
`
`v. Hotel
`132 A.D.3d
`
`Carlyle
`
`541,
`
`Owners
`20 N.Y.S.3d
`
`Corp.,
`341
`
`(1st Dep't
`
`2015)..
`
`.....
`
`Solow
`
`v. Wellner,
`86 N.Y.2d
`
`582
`
`(1995)
`
`................................................
`
`....
`
`............7
`
`S.R.
`
`Inc.
`Leon
`Co.,
`599 N.Y.S.2d
`
`v. Towers,
`194 A.D.2d
`53,
`
`600
`
`(2d Dep't
`
`1993)...
`
`............
`
`Tarantul
`
`v. Cherkassky,
`84 A.D.3d
`933,
`
`923 N.Y.S.2d
`
`133
`
`(2d Dep't
`
`2011).................
`
`Travelsavers
`Enterprises,
`149 A.D.3d
`1003,
`
`v. Analog
`Inc.
`53 N.Y.S.3d
`
`Analytics,
`99 (2d Dep't
`
`Inc.,
`
`2017)
`
`................
`
`...............................7
`
`.7
`
`9
`
`7
`
`7
`
`Rules
`
`CPLR
`
`3211
`
`...........................
`
`................................................................................1,
`
`5, 13
`
`1
`
`3 of 15
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/27/2019 03:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/27/2019
`
`Defendants
`
`John
`
`Robertshaw,
`
`individually
`
`and
`
`as Trustee
`
`of
`
`the Robertshaw
`
`Charitable
`
`Remainder
`
`Trust,
`
`dated
`
`June
`
`22,
`
`2016,
`
`and
`
`Elizabeth
`
`Robertshaw
`
`("Defendants"
`
`or
`
`the
`
`"Robertshaws")
`
`by
`
`and
`
`through
`
`their
`
`undersigned
`
`attorneys,
`
`hereby
`
`respectfully
`
`submit
`
`this
`
`memorandum
`
`of
`
`law in support
`
`of
`
`their motion
`
`to dismiss
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`complaint
`
`pursuant
`
`to CPLR
`
`3211(a)(1)
`
`and
`
`3211(a)(7).
`
`PRELIMINARY
`
`STATEMENT
`
`Defendants
`
`made
`
`the mistake
`
`of
`
`renting
`
`their
`
`family
`
`home
`
`to Plaintiffs,
`
`a rich
`
`couple
`
`from
`
`with
`
`Atlanta
`
`who
`
`apparently
`
`couldn't
`
`deal
`
`living
`
`in New York
`
`City.
`
`Instead
`
`of
`
`coming
`
`to terms
`
`with
`
`the
`
`realities
`
`of
`
`living
`
`in Manhattan,
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`manufactured
`
`a mouse
`
`infestation,
`
`threatened
`
`Defendants,
`
`and
`
`ultimately
`
`filed
`
`a false
`
`and
`
`defamatory
`
`complaint
`
`in this Court,
`
`designed
`
`to both
`
`destroy
`
`the
`
`value
`
`of
`
`Defeñdañts'
`
`home
`
`and
`
`damage
`
`Defendants'
`
`reputation.
`
`But
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`will
`
`not
`
`and
`
`cannot
`
`succeed:
`
`the
`
`very
`
`leases
`
`that
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`signed
`
`and
`
`on which
`
`sue bar
`
`their
`
`claims
`
`they
`
`here.
`
`Even
`
`if
`
`the
`
`false
`
`and
`
`defamatory
`
`statements
`
`in
`
`the Complaint
`
`were
`
`true
`
`(they
`
`are
`
`not),
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`rented
`
`Defendants'
`
`home
`
`after
`
`inspecting
`
`it over
`
`several
`
`days,
`
`confirming
`
`everything
`
`was
`
`in "good
`
`order,"
`
`and
`
`taking
`
`Defendants'
`
`home
`
`"as
`
`is."
`
`These
`
`represêñtations
`
`and
`
`statements
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`bar
`
`fraud-
`
`and
`
`contract-based
`
`claims.
`
`The Court
`
`should
`
`immediately
`
`dismiss
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`complaint
`
`and
`
`award
`
`Defendants
`
`attorneys'
`
`fees
`
`incurred
`
`in responding
`
`to the
`
`baseless
`
`Complaint.
`
`STATEMENT
`
`OF FACTS
`
`Defendants,
`
`the Robertshaws,
`
`are the
`
`owners
`
`and
`
`landlords
`
`of
`
`166 East
`
`81st
`
`Street
`
`("166")
`
`and
`
`179 East
`
`80tl¹ Street
`
`("179"
`
`and
`
`together
`
`with
`
`166,
`
`the
`
`"Premises").
`
`Complaint
`
`at ¶¶
`
`17-19,
`
`Mays
`
`v. Robertshaw,
`
`Index
`
`No.
`
`152230/2019,
`
`NYSCEF
`
`Doc.
`
`No.
`
`1 (Sup.
`
`Ct. New York
`
`County
`
`March
`
`1,
`
`2019).1
`
`The
`
`Premises
`
`is
`
`a truly
`
`rare
`
`and
`
`unique
`
`property,
`
`comprised
`
`of
`
`two
`
`1860s
`
`A full and cc,niplete
`
`copy of
`
`the Co-plai-t,
`
`hicludh
`
`g exhibits
`
`(NYSCEF
`
`Doc Nos. 2-11)
`
`is Ecypcaded to the
`
`2
`
`4 of 15
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/27/2019 03:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/27/2019
`
`townhouses
`
`connected
`
`by a garden
`
`and
`
`a pool.
`
`Id
`
`Defendants
`
`lived
`
`there
`
`for
`
`almost
`
`twenty
`
`years
`
`and
`
`raised
`
`their
`
`four
`
`children
`
`in the Premises
`
`without
`
`any mouse
`
`or other
`
`pest
`
`infestations.
`
`Id
`
`;
`
`Affidavit
`
`of
`
`John
`
`Robertshaw,
`
`sworn
`
`to March
`
`26,
`
`2019,
`
`at
`
`¶ 5 ("Robertshaw
`
`Aff.").
`
`The
`
`Robertshaws
`
`have
`
`a lifetime
`
`of
`
`good
`
`memories
`
`there,
`
`which
`
`are
`
`being
`
`ruined
`
`by Plaintiffs,
`
`who
`
`lied
`
`and
`
`caused
`
`damage
`
`to both
`
`the Premises
`
`and
`
`the Robertshaws.
`
`Robertshaw
`
`have maliciously
`
`Aff.
`
`at ¶¶ 4, 5.
`
`In
`
`2018,
`
`after
`
`John
`
`Robertshaw
`
`retired
`
`from
`
`his
`
`30-year
`
`employment
`
`in Manhattan,
`
`the
`
`Robertshaws
`
`moved
`
`out
`
`of New York
`
`City,
`
`and
`
`looked
`
`to rent
`
`the Premises
`
`to tenants
`
`who
`
`could
`
`and would
`
`appreciate
`
`the Premises
`
`for
`
`the wonderful
`
`home
`
`and
`
`rare New York
`
`City
`
`property
`
`that
`
`it
`
`is.
`
`Id
`
`at ¶¶ 5, 6, 7.
`
`The
`
`Premises
`
`has
`
`a tremendous
`
`amount
`
`of character
`
`and
`
`style
`
`than
`
`the
`
`cutter
`
`"McMansions"
`
`that
`
`are popular
`
`in other
`
`parts
`
`of
`
`-
`
`far different
`
`as Atlanta
`
`cookie
`
`the country,
`
`such
`
`Id
`
`at ¶ 7. Defendants
`
`engaged
`
`the Corcoran
`
`Group,
`
`a major
`
`New York
`
`City
`
`real
`
`estate
`
`brokerage
`
`company,
`
`to inspect,
`
`assess,
`
`and market
`
`the Premises
`
`and
`
`locate
`
`suitable
`
`tenants.
`
`Id
`
`; Compl.
`
`at ¶
`
`35.
`
`Over
`
`the
`
`course
`
`of many
`
`months,
`
`Corcoran
`
`never
`
`observed
`
`any mice
`
`or other
`
`pest
`
`issue
`
`at
`
`the
`
`Premises.
`
`Robertshaw
`
`Aff.
`
`at ¶ 8.
`
`The Corcoran
`
`Group
`
`ultimately
`
`found
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`Darrell
`
`and Tara Mays
`
`("Plaintiffs"),
`
`who
`
`were
`
`longtime
`
`residents
`
`of Atlanta,
`
`Georgia.
`
`Id
`
`Mays
`
`holds
`
`himself
`
`at ¶ 9; Compl.
`
`at ¶ 33. Darrell
`
`out
`
`as a wealthy
`
`businessman
`
`and his wife
`
`Tara Mays
`
`advertises
`
`herself
`
`as a socialite.
`
`Robertshaw
`
`Aff.
`
`at ¶ 9. Plaintiffs
`
`viewed
`
`and
`
`inspected
`
`the Premises
`
`several
`
`times
`
`before
`
`they
`
`decided
`
`to rent
`
`the Premises.
`
`Id
`
`at ¶ 10; Compl.
`
`at ¶ 37.
`
`They
`
`signed
`
`two-year
`
`"as-is"
`
`leases
`
`for
`
`each
`
`of
`
`the
`
`townhouses
`
`that
`
`comprise
`
`the Premises
`
`(together,
`
`the "Leases").2
`
`Robertshaw
`
`Aff.
`
`at ¶ 11; Compl.
`
`at ¶¶ 5, 42.
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`agreed
`
`to pay
`
`the total monthly
`
`rent
`
`of $43,000
`
`for
`
`the Premises.
`
`Robertshaw
`
`Affirmation
`2
`
`dated March
`of Alan R. Arkin,
`as Exhibit
`The Leases are anached
`
`26, 2019 (the "Arkin
`Aff."),
`A to Plaintiffs'
`C=phint,
`
`1 (the "Complaint"
`as Exhibit
`found
`at Exhibit
`1 to the Arkin
`
`or "Compl.").
`Affinnation.
`
`3
`
`5 of 15
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/27/2019 03:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/27/2019
`
`Aff.
`
`at ¶ 11.; Compl.
`
`at ¶ 5. The
`
`Leases
`
`provided
`
`that
`
`"[t]he
`
`rent
`
`payment
`
`for
`
`each month
`
`must
`
`be
`
`paid
`
`on the
`
`first
`
`day
`
`of
`
`the month
`
`at Landlord's
`
`address."
`
`Leases
`
`at ¶ 3 (Arkin
`
`Aff.,
`
`Ex.
`
`1 at Ex.
`
`A).
`
`The
`
`Leases
`
`also
`
`provide
`
`that
`
`"Tenant
`
`has
`
`inspected
`
`the Apartment
`
`and Building.
`
`Tenant
`
`states
`
`they
`
`are
`
`in good
`
`order
`
`and
`
`repair
`
`and
`
`takes
`
`the Apartment
`
`as is except
`
`for
`
`latent
`
`defects."
`
`Leases
`
`at ¶ 31.
`
`Unfortunately,
`
`soon
`
`after moving
`
`into
`
`the Premises,
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`apparently
`
`decided
`
`that
`
`they
`
`because
`
`had made
`
`a mistake
`
`in
`
`renting
`
`the
`
`Premises,
`
`perhaps
`
`the Premises
`
`was
`
`not
`
`a sanitized
`
`McMansion,
`
`perhaps
`
`because
`
`the
`
`rent
`
`was
`
`too
`
`high,
`
`or perhaps
`
`because
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`were
`
`simply
`
`unaccustomed
`
`to living
`
`in New York
`
`City.
`
`See generally
`
`Compl.;
`
`Compl.
`
`at ¶ 5; Robertshaw
`
`Aff.
`
`at ¶ 14.
`
`But
`
`rather
`
`than
`
`forthrightly
`
`address
`
`their
`
`renters'
`
`remorse
`
`with
`
`Defendants,
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`instead
`
`manufactured
`
`a phony
`
`mouse
`
`infestation,
`
`threatened
`
`to
`
`expose
`
`the
`
`so-called
`
`infestation
`
`unless
`
`Defendants
`
`let Plaintiffs
`
`out
`
`of
`
`the
`
`Leases,
`
`and when
`
`that
`
`ruse
`
`filed
`
`a false
`
`publicly
`
`failed,
`
`complaint
`
`in this
`
`Court
`
`designed
`
`to
`
`destroy
`
`the
`
`value
`
`of
`
`the Premises
`
`and
`
`impugn
`
`Defendants'
`
`reputation,
`
`who
`
`were
`
`responsive
`
`and
`
`responsible
`
`landlords.
`
`Notwithstanding
`
`the many
`
`colorful
`
`references
`
`to
`
`"vermin"
`
`and
`
`the
`
`"rodent
`
`scourge"
`
`in
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`infestation"
`
`complaint,
`
`or
`
`the photos
`
`of dead mice
`
`appeñded
`
`to the Complaint,
`
`the
`
`so-called
`
`"mouse
`
`of
`
`the
`
`Premises
`
`was
`
`not
`
`real.
`
`There
`
`was
`
`no
`
`infestation
`
`during
`
`the many
`
`years
`
`that
`
`Defendants
`
`lived
`
`and
`
`there
`
`was
`
`no
`
`infestation
`
`the
`
`time
`
`the Plaintiffs
`
`in the Premises,
`
`during
`
`that
`
`resided
`
`at
`
`the Premises.
`
`Robertshaw
`
`Aff.
`
`at ¶ 16.
`
`Even
`
`if
`
`there
`
`were
`
`a few mice,
`
`as any New York
`
`City
`
`resident
`
`will
`
`experience
`
`from
`
`time
`
`to time
`
`(and
`
`certainly
`
`residents
`
`of
`
`1860s
`
`era townhames),
`
`a few mice
`
`do not
`
`render
`
`the Premises
`
`uninhabitable.
`
`Nor
`
`do mice
`
`conspire
`
`with
`
`humans
`
`to hold
`
`off
`
`on
`
`entering
`
`a home
`
`until
`
`after
`
`a lease
`
`is
`
`signed.
`
`In
`
`any
`
`case,
`
`as Plaintiffs
`
`admit
`
`in
`
`their
`
`Complaint,
`
`Defendants
`
`promptly
`
`attended
`
`to
`
`all
`
`of
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`w11w1113,
`
`including
`
`sending
`
`4
`
`6 of 15
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/27/2019 03:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/27/2019
`
`workmen
`
`and
`
`exterminators
`
`to the Premises.
`
`E.g.,
`
`Compl.
`
`at ¶¶ 53,
`
`55,
`
`58,
`
`98,
`
`100,
`
`101,
`
`104,
`
`105,
`
`106,
`
`107,
`
`108,
`
`109,
`
`110,
`
`112,
`
`113,
`
`114,
`
`115;
`
`Robertshaw
`
`Aff.
`
`at ¶¶
`
`17, 23.
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`also
`
`admit
`
`that
`
`they
`
`did
`
`not move
`
`out
`
`of
`
`the
`
`so-called
`
`"infested"
`
`home
`
`until
`
`months
`
`after
`
`they
`
`claim
`
`the
`
`problem
`
`was
`
`too
`
`unbearable
`
`(Compl.
`
`at ¶ 5),
`
`laying
`
`bare
`
`their
`
`claim
`
`of
`
`constructive
`
`eviction
`
`for
`
`the
`
`subterfuge
`
`it
`
`is.
`
`manufactured
`
`a so-called
`
`mouse
`
`infestation.
`
`their
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`quite
`
`literally
`
`Lacking
`
`from
`
`Complaint
`
`are
`
`the
`
`facts
`
`that
`
`(1) Plaintiffs
`
`created
`
`an illegal
`
`apartment
`
`for
`
`their
`
`housekeeper
`
`and
`
`her
`
`husband,
`
`who
`
`lived
`
`illegally
`
`in the
`
`basement
`
`in violation
`
`of
`
`the
`
`leases
`
`and New York
`
`housing
`
`laws
`
`-
`
`and
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`admit
`
`that
`
`their
`
`housekeeper
`
`"slept"
`
`in
`
`the
`
`basement
`
`(Compl.
`
`at ¶ 83);
`
`(2) Plaintiffs
`
`allowed
`
`their
`
`housekeeper
`
`to keep
`
`and
`
`cook
`
`food
`
`in the
`
`illegal
`
`basement
`
`apartment;
`
`and
`
`(3)
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`- without
`
`any
`
`authorization
`
`from
`
`Defendants
`
`and
`
`in violation
`
`of
`
`the
`
`Leases
`
`-
`
`interior
`
`created
`
`holes
`
`in the
`
`walls
`
`directly
`
`to the
`
`exterior
`
`at street
`
`level
`
`(to
`
`run
`
`cables
`
`and wires),
`
`creating
`
`openings
`
`for
`
`mice
`
`to
`
`enter
`
`the
`
`Premises
`
`that
`
`they
`
`never
`
`repaired
`
`or
`
`remediated.
`
`Robertshaw
`
`Aff.
`
`at ¶¶
`
`19-21.
`
`In
`
`other
`
`words,
`
`it was
`
`the Plaintiffs
`
`and
`
`their
`
`disregard
`
`for New
`
`York
`
`City
`
`housing
`
`laws,
`
`construction
`
`and
`
`permitting
`
`laws,
`
`and
`
`good
`
`sense
`
`that
`
`likely
`
`created
`
`any
`
`issues
`
`they
`
`experienced
`
`with
`
`mice.
`
`When
`
`their
`
`own
`
`conduct
`
`-
`
`performing
`
`unpermitted
`
`electrical
`
`work,
`
`cutting
`
`holes
`
`in the
`
`Premises
`
`to run
`
`cables,
`
`and
`
`creating
`
`an illegal
`
`apartment
`
`-
`
`resulted
`
`in a few mice
`
`in the Premises,
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`seized
`
`this
`
`excuse
`
`to blackmail
`
`Defendants
`
`and then
`
`to break
`
`the
`
`leases.
`
`See Robertshaw
`
`Aff.
`
`at ¶¶
`
`19-22.
`
`As Plaintiffs
`
`admit
`
`in their
`
`Complaint,
`
`Defendants
`
`promptly
`
`sent
`
`exterminators
`
`and
`
`other
`
`workers
`
`to the Premises
`
`to immediately
`
`address
`
`their
`
`tenants'
`
`concerns.
`
`E.g.,
`
`Compl.
`
`at
`
`¶¶ 53,
`
`55,
`
`58; Robertshaw
`
`Aff.
`
`at ¶ 23.
`
`After
`
`exterminators
`
`treated
`
`the
`
`Premises
`
`from
`
`August
`
`through
`
`October
`
`2018,
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`did
`
`not
`
`complain
`
`again
`
`to Defendants
`
`about
`
`any mouse
`
`issues
`
`5
`
`7 of 15
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/27/2019 03:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/27/2019
`
`(and
`
`certainly
`
`no
`
`"mouse
`
`infestation")
`
`until
`
`January
`
`2019,
`
`when
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`threatêñêd
`
`to
`
`the mouse
`
`infestation
`
`unless
`
`Defendants
`
`allowed
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`to break
`
`the Leases.
`
`See Compl.
`
`"expose"
`
`at ¶ 61
`
`(mice
`
`last
`
`seen
`
`in October
`
`2018)
`
`and
`
`¶ 70 (mice
`
`seen
`
`in January
`
`2019);
`
`Robertshaw
`
`Aff.
`
`at ¶¶
`
`23-
`
`24.
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`were
`
`extremely
`
`needy,
`
`time
`
`intensive,
`
`and
`
`high maintenance
`
`tenants,
`
`who
`
`were
`
`unaccustomed
`
`to
`
`living
`
`in
`
`a townhouse
`
`such
`
`as
`
`the
`
`Premises,
`
`and, more
`
`generally,
`
`apparently
`
`in New
`
`York
`
`City.
`
`Robertshaw
`
`Aff.
`
`18.
`
`unaccustomed
`
`to
`
`living
`
`¶
`
`Despite
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`being
`
`extremely
`
`high
`
`maintêñance,
`
`Defendants
`
`went
`
`above
`
`and
`
`beyond
`
`in
`
`their
`
`attempt
`
`to
`
`cater
`
`to
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`reasonably
`
`addressing
`
`a myriad
`
`of
`
`real
`
`and
`
`imagined
`
`concerns
`
`and making
`
`their
`
`own
`
`staff
`
`and
`
`service
`
`professionals
`
`available
`
`at all
`
`hours
`
`to Plaintiffs.
`
`E.g.,
`
`Compl.
`
`at ¶¶ 53,
`
`55,
`
`58,
`
`98,
`
`100,
`
`101,
`
`104,
`
`105,
`
`106,
`
`107,
`
`108,
`
`109,
`
`110,
`
`112,
`
`113,
`
`114,
`
`115; Robertshaw
`
`Aff.
`
`at ¶¶ 17, 23.
`
`did was
`
`and now Plaintiffs
`
`claim
`
`that
`
`all
`
`these
`
`services
`
`But
`
`nothing
`
`Defendants
`
`enough,
`
`perversely
`
`interrupted
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`"quiet
`
`enjoyment"
`
`of
`
`the Premises.
`
`Robertshaw
`
`Aff.
`
`¶ 18.
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`stopped
`
`paying
`
`rent
`
`in or about
`
`Jañüary
`
`2019.
`
`Robertshaw
`
`Aff.
`
`¶ 25.
`
`They
`
`failed
`
`to pay
`
`February
`
`rent,
`
`when
`
`they
`
`were
`
`still
`
`living
`
`in the Premises.
`
`Id
`
`at ¶ 26.
`
`They
`
`failed
`
`to pay
`
`March
`
`rent;
`
`ultimately,
`
`they
`
`vacated
`
`the Premises
`
`sometime
`
`in early March
`
`2019,
`
`taking
`
`with
`
`them
`
`some
`
`of
`
`Defeñdañts'
`
`property
`
`and
`
`further
`
`damaging
`
`the Premises
`
`on their
`
`way
`
`out.
`
`Id
`
`at ¶ 27.
`
`As
`
`of
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`owe
`
`$43,000
`
`a result
`
`of
`
`their
`
`breach
`
`the
`
`Leases,
`
`Defendants
`
`per month
`
`beginning
`
`in
`
`February
`
`2019
`
`through
`
`the
`
`end
`
`of
`
`the term of
`
`the Leases
`
`(for
`
`a total
`
`of $731,000),
`
`more
`
`than
`
`$5,000
`
`for
`
`damages
`
`caused
`
`by Plaintiffs
`
`to the Premises
`
`(including
`
`the pool
`
`and the
`
`front
`
`stoop),
`
`and more
`
`than
`
`$3,000
`
`for
`
`the
`
`televisions
`
`and
`
`other
`
`property
`
`of
`
`the Defendants
`
`that
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`stole
`
`before
`
`leaving
`
`the Premises.
`
`Id
`
`at 28-30.
`
`Defêñdâñts'
`
`But
`
`claims
`
`against
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`are
`
`not
`
`before
`
`the Court
`
`at
`
`this
`
`time.
`
`What
`
`is
`
`6
`
`8 of 15
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/27/2019 03:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/27/2019
`
`before
`
`the Court
`
`is
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`Complaint,
`
`which
`
`cannot
`
`stand
`
`up against
`
`the
`
`documents
`
`on which
`
`it
`
`is based
`
`-
`
`the
`
`Leases.
`
`On the
`
`third
`
`page
`
`and
`
`31st paragraph
`
`of each
`
`Lease,
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`took
`
`both
`
`townhouses
`
`"as
`
`is."
`
`Leases
`
`at ¶ 31
`
`(Arkin
`
`Aff.,
`
`Ex.
`
`1 at Ex.
`
`A).
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`confirmed
`
`that
`
`they
`
`"inspected
`
`the Apartment[s]
`
`Building."
`
`and
`
`Id
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`"state[d]
`
`they
`
`[the Premises]
`
`are in good
`
`order
`
`and
`
`repair."
`
`Id
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`confirmed
`
`they
`
`were
`
`"tak[ing]
`
`the Apartment
`
`is."
`
`as
`
`Id.
`
`These
`
`statements
`
`bar
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`claims
`
`- even
`
`if
`
`their
`
`allegations
`
`were
`
`true.
`
`But
`
`they
`
`are not.
`
`The Premises
`
`was
`
`not
`
`infested
`
`with mice,
`
`as confirmed
`
`the pest
`
`control
`
`by
`
`service
`
`that Plaintiffs
`
`claim
`
`labeled
`
`the house
`
`"infested"
`
`rodents.
`
`by
`
`See Robertshaw
`
`Aff.
`
`at ¶¶
`
`31-
`
`32, Ex. A. That
`
`company,
`
`Orkin,
`
`inspected
`
`the Premises
`
`after
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`moved
`
`out
`
`and
`
`confirmed
`
`no
`
`indication
`
`of
`
`any mice
`
`infestation
`
`after
`
`a thorough
`
`inspection
`
`of
`
`the
`
`basement
`
`and
`
`first
`
`floor.
`
`the Orkin
`
`inspection
`
`report
`
`(the
`
`"Orkin
`
`is attached
`
`to
`
`the
`
`A true
`
`and
`
`correct
`
`copy
`
`of
`
`Report")
`
`Robertshaw
`
`Affidavit
`
`as Exhibit
`
`A.
`
`A few mice,
`
`over
`
`the
`
`course
`
`of
`
`six months,
`
`in a residential
`
`space
`
`ten
`
`times
`
`larger
`
`than most Manhattan
`
`apartments
`
`is not
`
`an infestation
`
`and
`
`does
`
`not
`
`render
`
`a
`
`home
`
`vermin"
`
`"üñiñhabitable."
`
`Nor
`
`do mice
`
`make
`
`tenants
`
`"prisoners."
`
`(Plaintiffs'
`
`claims
`
`of
`
`"dodging
`
`and
`
`"piles
`
`of
`
`bodies"
`
`are
`
`defamatory
`
`fantasy.)
`
`Finally,
`
`workmen
`
`at
`
`the
`
`Premises
`
`to
`
`address
`
`tenants'
`
`concerns
`
`do
`
`not
`
`interrupt
`
`tenañts'
`
`"quiet
`
`enjoymeñt"
`
`of
`
`the
`
`home.
`
`Rather,
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`allegations
`
`demonstrate
`
`the
`
`opposite,
`
`that Defendants
`
`catered
`
`to their
`
`tenants'
`
`needs
`
`to
`
`insure
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`enjoyment
`
`of
`
`the Premises.
`
`Standard
`
`on Motion
`
`to Dismiss
`
`On a motion
`
`to dismiss
`
`pursuant
`
`to CPLR
`
`3211,
`
`"the
`
`pleading
`
`is to be afforded
`
`a liberal
`
`construction.
`
`[The
`
`Court]
`
`accept[s]
`
`the facts
`
`as alleged
`
`in the
`
`complaiñt
`
`as true,
`
`accord[s]
`
`plaintiffs
`
`the
`
`benefit
`
`of
`
`every
`
`possible
`
`favorable
`
`inference,
`
`and
`
`determine[s]
`
`only
`
`whether
`
`the
`
`facts
`
`as
`
`alleged
`
`fit within
`
`any
`
`cognizable
`
`legal
`
`theory."
`
`Leon
`
`v. Martinez,
`
`84 N.Y.2d
`
`83,
`
`87-88,
`
`638 N.E.2d
`
`7
`
`9 of 15
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/27/2019 03:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/27/2019
`
`511,
`
`513
`
`(1994).
`
`A motion
`
`to dismiss
`
`based
`
`on CPLR
`
`3211(a)(1),
`
`on the
`
`grounds
`
`that
`
`the
`
`claim
`
`is
`
`barred
`
`by
`
`documentary
`
`evideñce,
`
`"may
`
`be
`
`appropriately
`
`granted
`
`only
`
`where
`
`the
`
`documentary
`
`evidence
`
`matter
`
`of
`
`utterly
`
`law."
`
`refutes
`
`plaintiff
`
`s factual
`
`allegations,
`
`conclusively
`
`establishing
`
`a defense
`
`as a
`
`Goshen
`
`v. Mutual
`
`Life
`
`Insurance
`
`Company
`
`of New York,
`
`98 N.Y.2d
`
`314,
`
`326,
`
`746
`
`N.Y.S.2d
`
`858,
`
`865
`
`(2002)
`
`(citing
`
`Leon,
`
`84 N.Y.2d
`
`at 87-88,
`
`614 N.Y.S.2d
`
`at 974).
`
`For
`
`a motion
`
`determines
`
`"'whether
`
`the
`
`proponent
`
`of
`
`the
`
`to
`
`dismiss
`
`based
`
`on CPLR
`
`3211(a)(1)(7),
`
`the Court
`
`pleading
`
`has
`
`a cause
`
`of
`
`action,
`
`not whether
`
`he has
`
`stated
`
`one."'
`
`Leon,
`
`84 N.Y.2d
`
`at 87-88,
`
`614
`
`N.Y.S.2d
`
`at 974
`
`(citations
`
`omitted).
`
`ARGUMENT
`
`L
`
`Plaintiff's
`
`Claims
`
`Fail
`
`Because
`
`They
`
`Took
`
`the Properties
`
`"As
`
`Is"
`
`in the
`
`Leases
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`claims
`
`all
`
`fail
`
`here
`
`on the
`
`basis
`
`of
`
`the
`
`very
`
`documents
`
`that
`
`underlie
`
`their
`
`claims:
`
`the
`
`Leases.
`
`After
`
`visiting
`
`the Premises
`
`on several
`
`occasions,
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`decided
`
`to rent
`
`the Premises
`
`Both
`
`Leases
`
`state
`
`that
`
`the Premises
`
`are taken
`
`"as
`
`and
`
`signed
`
`the
`
`Leases.
`
`Compl.
`
`¶ 37.
`
`expressly
`
`is"
`
`- Plaintiffs
`
`order
`
`and
`
`repair"
`
`represented
`
`that
`
`they
`
`had
`
`"inspected
`
`the
`
`[Premises
`
`and]
`
`state[]
`
`they
`
`are
`
`in good
`
`and
`
`then
`
`confirmed
`
`that
`
`they
`
`were
`
`"tak[ing]
`
`the
`
`[Premises]
`
`is."
`
`as
`
`See Leases
`
`at
`
`¶ 31 (Arkin
`
`Aff.,
`
`Ex.
`
`1 at Ex. A).
`
`Both
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`signed
`
`both
`
`Leases,
`
`making
`
`these
`
`representations
`
`and
`
`taking
`
`the Premises
`
`"as
`
`is."
`
`See
`
`id
`
`at signature
`
`pages
`
`(both
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`sign
`
`as Tenants).
`
`In
`
`representations
`
`not made
`
`in the
`
`Leases.
`
`Id
`
`at
`
`addition,
`
`the
`
`Leases
`
`both
`
`explicitly
`
`disclaim
`
`any
`
`¶ 28 ("Tenant
`
`has
`
`read
`
`this
`
`Lease.
`
`All
`
`promises
`
`made
`
`by
`
`the
`
`Landlord
`
`are in this
`
`Lease.
`
`There
`
`are
`
`no others.").
`
`This
`
`documentary
`
`evidence
`
`"utterly
`
`refutes"
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`claims
`
`that Defendants
`
`"defrauded"
`
`Plaintiffs.
`
`Goshen,
`
`98 N.Y.2d
`
`at 326,
`
`746 N.Y.S.2d
`
`at 865 ; Dolansky
`
`v. Frisillo,
`
`92 A.D.3d
`
`1286,
`
`1289,
`
`939 N.Y.S.2d
`
`210,
`
`214
`
`(2012)
`
`(holding
`
`that
`
`taking
`
`property
`
`is"
`
`"as
`
`with
`
`a disclaimer
`
`of
`
`representations,
`
`as made
`
`here,
`
`"extinguished"
`
`any
`
`8
`
`fraud
`
`claims).
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`entered
`
`into
`
`the
`
`Leases
`
`10 of 15
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/27/2019 03:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/27/2019
`
`with
`
`their
`
`eyes wide
`
`open,
`
`after
`
`personally
`
`inspecting
`
`the Premises
`
`(on more
`
`than
`
`one
`
`occasion).
`
`They
`
`accepted
`
`the Premises
`
`"as
`
`is,"
`
`even
`
`if
`
`"as
`
`is"
`
`meant
`
`a mouse
`
`in the
`
`house
`
`or a roach
`
`on the
`
`floor.
`
`(This
`
`is New York
`
`City,
`
`after
`
`all.)
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`knowing
`
`acceptance
`
`of
`
`the Premises
`
`"as
`
`is"
`
`and
`
`the
`
`Leases'
`
`explicit
`
`disclaimer
`
`of any
`
`other
`
`representations
`
`preclude
`
`a claim
`
`that Defendants
`
`hid
`
`the
`
`suitability
`
`or habitability
`
`of
`
`the Premises.
`
`S.R.
`
`Leon
`
`Co.,
`
`Inc.
`
`v. Towers,
`
`599 N.Y.S.2d
`
`53,
`
`(2d Dep't
`
`(rejected
`
`fraud
`
`claim
`
`based
`
`on alleged
`
`misrepresentation
`
`54,
`
`194 A.D.2d
`
`600,
`
`601
`
`1993)
`
`where
`
`tenant
`
`took
`
`space
`
`"as
`
`is"
`
`and
`
`"inspected
`
`the
`
`building"
`
`before
`
`signing
`
`the
`
`lease);
`
`Tarantul
`
`v.
`
`Cherkassky,
`
`84 A.D.3d
`
`933,
`
`934-35,
`
`923 N.Y.S.2d
`
`133,
`
`135
`
`(2d Dep't
`
`2011)
`
`(rejecting
`
`fraud
`
`claim
`
`where
`
`real
`
`property
`
`buyer
`
`confirmed
`
`their
`
`own
`
`inspection
`
`of
`
`the
`
`property
`
`before
`
`entering
`
`into
`
`the
`
`contract);
`
`see also
`
`Travelsavers
`
`Enterprises,
`
`Inc.
`
`v. Analog
`
`Analytics,
`
`Inc.,
`
`149 A.D.3d
`
`1003,
`
`1007,
`
`53 N.Y.S.3d
`
`99,
`
`105
`
`(2d Dep't
`
`2017)
`
`(dismissing
`
`claim
`
`for
`
`fraud
`
`based
`
`on the
`
`disclaimer
`
`clause
`
`is"
`
`contract
`
`in
`
`the
`
`contract).
`
`When
`
`a tenant
`
`takes
`
`property
`
`"as
`
`in
`
`the
`
`lease,
`
`"the
`
`specifically
`
`'extinguishe[s]'
`
`any
`
`such
`
`claims"
`
`for
`
`fraud
`
`in the
`
`inducement.
`
`Dolansky,
`
`92 A.D.3d
`
`at 1289,
`
`939
`
`N.Y.S.2d
`
`at 214.
`
`II.
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`Claims
`
`Fail
`
`Beeâüse
`
`There
`
`Is No Infestation
`
`of
`
`the
`
`Premises
`
`causes
`
`of action
`
`also
`
`fail
`
`for
`
`the
`
`simple
`
`reason
`
`that
`
`they
`
`are not
`
`based
`
`in fact,
`
`as
`
`shown
`
`in the Orkin
`
`Report.
`
`After
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`moved
`
`out,
`
`Defendants
`
`requested
`
`that
`
`Orkin
`
`again
`
`and
`
`inspect
`
`the Premises
`
`Robertshaw
`
`Aff.
`
`The Orkin
`
`Report
`
`refutes
`
`the
`
`basic
`
`treat
`
`at ¶¶ 31-32.
`
`premise
`
`of
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`claims:
`
`"There
`
`were
`
`no rodents
`
`activity
`
`found
`
`at
`
`this
`
`account
`
`on this
`
`visit.
`
`A
`
`thorough
`
`inspection
`
`was
`
`done
`
`throughout
`
`the
`
`basement
`
`and
`
`first
`
`floor[.]
`
`All
`
`access
`
`points
`
`were
`
`sealed
`
`up
`
`on
`
`the
`
`inside
`
`and
`
`outside.
`
`There
`
`were
`
`no
`
`acculturation
`
`of
`
`dropping
`
`or urine
`
`smell
`
`to
`
`indicate
`
`any mice
`
`refutes"
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`infestation."
`
`Robertshaw
`
`Aff.
`
`Ex.
`
`A.
`
`This
`
`documentary
`
`evidence
`
`"utterly
`
`position
`
`that
`
`there
`
`was
`
`an infestation
`
`of mice
`
`that
`
`first
`
`imprisoned
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`in
`
`9
`
`11 of 15
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/27/2019 03:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/27/2019
`
`the Premises
`
`and
`
`then
`
`forced
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`to move
`
`out.
`
`See Goshen,
`
`98 N.Y.2d
`
`at 326,
`
`746 N.Y S.2d
`
`at 865.
`
`HI.
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`Enjoyment
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`Claims
`Fail
`
`of Warranty
`Breach
`for
`Upon Which
`to State
`a Claim
`
`of Habitability
`Relief
`
`Can
`
`Quiet
`and
`Be Granted
`
`third
`
`and
`
`fourth
`
`causes
`
`of
`
`action
`
`fail
`
`to
`
`state
`
`a claim
`
`upon
`
`which
`
`relief
`
`can
`
`be
`
`granted.
`
`Even
`
`assuming
`
`the
`
`truth
`
`of
`
`the Complaint's
`
`allegations
`
`(which
`
`the Orkin
`
`Report
`
`refutes,
`
`as laid
`
`out
`
`in Point
`
`II),
`
`a few dozen
`
`mice
`
`seen
`
`in the
`
`10,000-plus-square-foot
`
`Premises
`
`(a residence
`
`the
`
`average
`
`apartment
`
`size
`
`over
`
`the
`
`course
`
`of
`
`six months
`
`approximately
`
`ten
`
`times
`
`in Manhattan)
`
`do
`
`not
`
`an infestation
`
`make,
`
`nor
`
`do
`
`they make
`
`the
`
`entire
`
`Premises
`
`urdr-habitable.
`
`Park W
`
`E.g.,
`
`Mgmt.
`
`Corp.
`
`v. Mitchell,
`
`47 N.Y2d
`
`316,
`
`329,
`
`391 N.E.2d
`
`1288,
`
`1295
`
`(1979),
`
`cert
`
`denied
`
`444 U.S.
`
`992
`
`(1979)
`
`(holding
`
`that
`
`apartment
`
`homes
`
`affected
`
`by
`
`the
`
`elimination
`
`of
`
`"essential
`
`services
`
`bearing
`
`directly
`
`on
`
`the
`
`health
`
`and
`
`safety
`
`of
`
`the
`
`tenants,"
`
`"numerous
`
`violations
`
`of
`
`housing
`
`and
`
`sanitation
`
`codes,"
`
`and
`
`the
`
`"declaration
`
`of
`
`a health
`
`emergency"
`
`the
`
`were
`
`not
`
`rendered
`
`by
`
`City
`
`uñiñhabitable,
`
`but
`
`rather
`
`merely
`
`subject
`
`to a 10% rent
`
`abatement).
`
`As
`
`the Court
`
`of Appeals
`
`has
`
`repeatedly
`
`held,
`
`the warranty
`
`of habitability
`
`does
`
`not
`
`"make
`
`the
`
`landlord
`
`'a
`
`guarantor
`
`of
`
`every
`
`amenity
`
`customarily
`
`rendered
`
`in
`
`the
`
`landlord-tenant
`
`relationship'"
`
`and
`
`safety
`
`and
`
`the warrant
`
`"protects
`
`only
`
`against
`
`conditions
`
`that materially
`
`affect
`
`the
`
`health
`
`of
`
`tenants
`
`or deficiencies
`
`that
`
`'in
`
`the
`
`eyes
`
`of a reasonable
`
`person
`
`*
`
`*
`
`* deprive
`
`the tenant
`
`of
`
`those
`
`essential
`
`functions
`
`which
`
`a residence
`
`is expected
`
`to
`
`provide."
`
`Solow
`
`v. Wellner,
`
`86 N.Y2d
`
`not
`
`582,
`
`588
`
`(1995)
`
`(quoting
`
`Park W Mgt.,
`
`47 N.Y2d
`
`at 327,
`
`328,
`
`418).
`
`The
`
`warranty
`
`does
`
`increase
`
`if
`
`the
`
`residence
`
`is a
`
`"luxury"
`
`home;
`
`it does
`
`not
`
`change
`
`based
`
`on
`
`the marketing
`
`of
`
`the
`
`residence.
`
`Id.
`
`As
`
`the Albany
`
`City
`
`Court
`
`(located
`
`in a smaller,
`
`less
`
`densely
`
`populated
`
`city
`
`than
`
`New York
`
`City)
`
`recently
`
`noted,
`
`"a mouse
`
`scurrying
`
`here
`
`and there
`
`on an occasion
`
`or
`
`two
`
`is nothing
`
`out
`
`of
`
`the
`
`ordinary"
`
`and
`
`does
`
`not
`
`support
`
`a claim
`
`of
`
`the
`
`breach
`
`of
`
`the warranty
`
`of
`
`habitability.
`
`10
`
`12 of 15
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/27/2019 03:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/27/2019
`
`Morning
`
`Light
`
`Realty,
`
`LLC v. Brown,
`
`62 Misc.
`
`3d 274,
`
`282,
`
`87 N.Y.S.3d
`
`450,
`
`457
`
`(City
`
`Ct. Albany
`
`County
`
`2018).
`
`Nor
`
`does
`
`having
`
`workmen
`
`addressing
`
`(real
`
`and
`
`imagined)
`
`issues
`
`over
`
`the
`
`course
`
`of
`
`a
`
`tenancy
`
`- all
`
`at
`
`the
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`request
`
`- violate
`
`the
`
`covenant
`
`of quiet
`
`enjoyment.
`
`Rather,
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`allegations
`
`prove
`
`that
`
`Defendants
`
`were
`
`responsible
`
`and
`
`responsive
`
`-landlords,
`
`responding
`
`immediately
`
`to
`
`their
`
`tenants'
`
`complaiñts,
`
`elirninating
`
`any
`
`claim
`
`based
`
`on
`
`the
`
`quiet
`
`enjoymcat
`
`Bd.
`
`ofManagers
`
`ofSaratoga
`
`Condo.
`
`148 A.D.3d
`
`51 N.Y.S.3d
`
`covenant.
`
`Cf
`
`v. Shuminer,
`
`609,
`
`610,
`
`34,
`
`36
`
`(1st
`
`Dep't
`
`2017)
`
`(diaminaing
`
`breach
`
`of
`
`covenant
`
`of
`
`quiet
`
`enjoyment
`
`even
`
`where
`
`plaintiff
`
`alleged
`
`repairs
`
`were
`
`not
`
`done
`
`timely,
`
`because
`
`"Landlord
`
`was
`
`not
`
`required
`
`under
`
`the
`
`lease
`
`to
`
`minimize
`
`interference"
`
`with
`
`plaintiff's
`
`use
`
`of
`
`the
`
`premises);
`
`see
`
`also
`
`Schwartz
`
`v. Hotel
`
`Carlyle
`
`Owners
`
`Corp.,
`
`132 A.D.3d
`
`541,
`
`542,
`
`20 N.Y.S.3d
`
`341,
`
`343
`
`(1st Dep't
`
`2015)
`
`(rejecting
`
`action
`
`for
`
`covenant
`
`of
`
`quiet
`
`enjoyment
`
`where
`
`there
`
`was
`
`no
`
`"wrongful
`
`act
`
`the
`
`damages
`
`for
`
`breach
`
`of
`
`by
`
`landlord"
`
`in
`
`performing
`
`repairs
`
`from
`
`flooding
`
`that
`
`deprived
`
`tenant
`
`of
`
`the
`
`"beneficial
`
`or
`
`actual
`
`possession
`
`of
`
`the
`
`demised
`
`premises").
`
`It
`
`is well
`
`settled
`
`in New York
`
`that
`
`no action
`
`for
`
`damages
`
`based
`
`on an alleged
`
`breach
`
`of
`
`the
`
`covenant
`
`of quiet
`
`enjoyment
`
`can
`
`stand
`
`where
`
`the
`
`tenant
`
`does
`
`not
`
`vacate
`
`or abandon
`
`the
`
`property
`
`when
`
`the
`
`acts
`
`complained
`
`of
`
`occur.
`
`See,
`
`e.g., Dave
`
`Herstein
`
`Co.
`
`v. Columbia
`
`Pictures
`
`Corp.,
`
`4
`
`330
`
`("These
`
`it quite
`
`clear
`
`that
`
`unless
`
`there
`
`N.Y.2d
`
`117,
`
`121,
`
`149 N.E.2d
`
`328,
`
`(1958)
`
`cases make
`
`is an
`
`eviction,
`
`actual
`
`or
`
`constructive,
`
`there
`
`is no
`
`breach
`
`of
`
`the
`
`covenant
`
`of
`
`quiet
`
`enjoyment.").
`
`Here,
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`admit
`
`that
`
`they
`
`did
`
`not
`
`abandon
`
`the
`
`Premises
`
`during
`
`the
`
`six months
`
`when
`
`Defendants'
`
`workmen
`
`were
`
`supposedly
`
`disrupting
`
`their
`
`enjoyment
`
`of
`
`the Premises.
`
`Compl.
`
`at ¶¶
`
`5, 94-116.
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`further
`
`admit
`
`that
`
`they
`
`scheduled
`
`their
`
`departure
`
`from
`
`the Premises
`
`to when
`
`it was
`
`convenient
`
`for
`
`them
`
`(Compl.
`
`at ¶ 5), not when
`
`they
`
`allegedly
`
`suffered
`
`problems
`
`with
`
`mice
`
`11
`
`13 of 15
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/27/2019 03:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/27/2019
`
`or workmen
`
`(see Compl.
`
`at ¶l
`
`l6).
`
`These
`
`admissions
`
`in the Complaiñt
`
`doom
`
`their
`
`quiet
`
`enjoyment
`
`claim
`
`and
`
`the Court
`
`should
`
`dismiss
`
`it.
`
`IV.
`
`Court
`The
`in Connection
`
`Should
`with
`
`Award
`Defendssts
`Defendants'
`Response
`
`Attorneys'
`Fees
`to Plaintiffs'
`
`Incurred
`Complaint
`
`Because
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`claims
`
`all
`
`fail
`
`as
`
`a matter
`
`of
`
`law
`
`and/or
`
`on
`
`the
`
`basis
`
`of
`
`the
`
`very
`
`documents
`
`that
`
`underlie
`
`their
`
`claims,
`
`the
`
`Court
`
`should
`
`grant
`
`Defendants
`
`Leases
`
`contemplate
`
`that Defendants,
`
`as the
`
`landlords,
`
`will
`
`be entitled
`
`to
`
`attorneys'
`
`fees.
`
`The
`
`attorneys'
`
`fees,
`
`to be paid
`
`by
`
`the
`
`tenants,
`
`incurred
`
`by
`
`the
`
`landlords
`
`in
`
`coññection
`
`with
`
`the
`
`Leases,
`
`including
`
`any
`
`early
`
`or
`
`premature
`
`of
`
`the Premises
`
`tenants
`
`See Leases
`
`Ex.
`
`1 at Ex. A).
`
`vacating
`
`by
`
`at ¶¶ 5, 23 (Arkin
`
`Aff.,
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`By
`
`own
`
`admission,
`
`they
`
`vacated
`
`the
`
`Premises
`
`before
`
`the
`
`end
`
`of
`
`the
`
`Leases'
`
`term.
`
`Compl.
`
`at ¶¶ 5, 93.
`
`As
`
`shown
`
`above,
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`claims
`
`must
`
`all
`
`be dismissed.
`
`See Points
`
`I,
`
`II,
`
`and
`
`III.
`
`Plaintiffs'
`
`significant
`
`attorneys'
`
`baseless,
`
`frivolous,
`
`and
`
`false
`
`allegations
`
`have
`
`caused
`
`Defendants
`
`to
`
`incur
`
`fees
`
`responding
`
`to
`
`the Complaint,
`
`in
`
`addition
`
`to
`
`damages
`
`to
`
`Defendants'
`
`reputations,
`
`Defendants'
`
`two
`
`decades
`
`of
`
`happy
`
`memories,
`
`and
`
`Defendants'
`
`ability
`
`to
`
`rent
`
`the
`
`Premises
`
`in
`
`the
`
`future.
`
`Plaintiffs
`
`are
`
`therefore
`
`liable
`
`for
`
`Defendants'
`
`costs
`
`and
`
`attorneys'
`
`fees
`
`incurred
`
`herewith.
`
`12
`
`14 of 15
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/27/2019 03:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 15
`
`INDEX NO. 152230/2019
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/27/2019
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`For
`
`all
`
`the
`
`foregoing
`
`reasons,
`
`the Court
`
`should
`
`dismiss
`
`the Complaint
`
`pursuant
`
`to CPLR
`
`3211(a)(1)
`
`and
`
`3211(a)(7),
`
`award
`
`attorneys'
`
`fees
`
`and
`
`costs
`
`to Defendants,
`
`and
`
`grant
`
`such
`
`other
`
`and
`
`further
`
`relief
`
`as the Court
`
`deems
`
`just
`
`and
`
`proper.
`
`Date:
`
`New York,
`March
`27,
`
`New York
`2019
`
`Respectfully
`
`submitted,
`
`CKR LAW LLP
`
`By:
`
`the Americas
`
`an R. Ukin
`M. Blase
`Kristie
`1330
`of
`Avenue
`14*
`Floor
`New York
`New York,
`Tel.:
`259-7300
`(212)
`Email:
`aarkin@ckrlaw.com
`kblase(&ckrlaw.com
`
`10019
`
`John
`as
`and
`Charitable
`June
`
`22,
`
`2016,
`
`Attorneys
`
`for
`
`Defendants
`
`Robertshaw,
`Trustee
`Remainder
`and Elizabeth
`
`of
`
`individually
`the Robertshaw
`dated
`Trust,
`Robertshaw
`
`13
`
`15 of 15
`
`