Representing the landlord of a building in the Bronx, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. successfully defeated a motion to dismiss a nonpayment proceeding brought by tenants illegally operating a business out of the building.

We commenced a Supreme Court action against the tenants seeking equitable relief in the form of specific performance and an injunction.  While that action remained pending, we thereafter commenced a nonpayment proceeding by filing a notice of petition and petition after serving the tenants with the requisite rent-demand for the tenants’ failure to pay rent to the landlord for months, leaving a significant balance in arrears.

The tenants, through counsel, moved to dismiss the nonpayment petition on the grounds that there is another action pending in Supreme Court between the same parties for the same cause of action.  We immediately opposed the tenants’ motion to dismiss the nonpayment proceeding, arguing that the Supreme Court action and the nonpayment proceeding seek inherently different relief, and do not consist of the same cause of action, even though they may arise out of the same subject matter.

After the motion was fully briefed, the Court set the matter down for oral argument, where we zealously advocated for our client’s right to seek rent arrears in Civil Court, the proper forum for such claim.

The Court agreed with and adopted our arguments in its decision, and ultimately denied the tenants’ motion to dismiss.

The landlord is represented by Dov Treiman, Carolyn Z. Rualo, and Michael Nesheiwat, all attorneys at Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.  Mr. Treiman drafted the opposition papers and Mr. Nesheiwat argued before the Court on behalf of the landlord.