Sobel v. Higgins, 63 N.Y.2d 746 (1984): Landlord’s Eviction Rights Limited by Tenant’s Protected Status

Sobel v. Higgins, 63 N.Y.2d 746 (1984)

A landlord’s right to evict a tenant for personal use is limited when the tenant is protected under statutes designed to safeguard elderly or disabled, long-term residents.

Summary

This case addresses the limitations placed on a landlord’s ability to evict a tenant for personal use due to statutory protections afforded to certain tenants. The New York Court of Appeals held that amendments to the Administrative Code of the City of New York, the Emergency Housing Rent Control Law, and the Emergency Tenant Protection Act prevent a landlord from evicting a tenant who is 62 years or older, has resided in the premises for 20 years or more, or has a permanent, medically demonstrable impairment preventing substantial gainful employment, provided the tenant was in possession on the statute’s effective date. The matter was remitted for redetermination consistent with these amendments.

Facts

The petitioners, Sobel, sought to evict their tenant, Higgins, for their own necessary use of the apartment. However, during the proceedings, amendments to relevant housing laws took effect, providing protection against eviction for tenants meeting specific criteria related to age, residency duration, or medical impairment.

Procedural History

The case initially involved an application by the landlords to evict the tenant. After amendments to relevant housing laws took effect, the matter was brought before the Court of Appeals. The Appellate Division’s order was reversed, and the case was remitted for redetermination considering the new statutory protections.

Issue(s)

Whether amendments to the Administrative Code of the City of New York, the Emergency Housing Rent Control Law, and the Emergency Tenant Protection Act prevent a landlord from evicting a tenant for personal use when the tenant is 62 years of age or older, has been a tenant for 20 years or more, or has a medically demonstrable impairment which is expected to be permanent and prevents the tenant from engaging in substantial gainful employment.

Holding

Yes, because under recent amendments to the Administrative Code of the City of New York, the Emergency Housing Rent Control Law, and the Emergency Tenant Protection Act, a landlord may no longer evict a tenant in good faith for his own necessary use or that of his immediate family where a member of the tenant’s household meets the criteria of age, residency, or disability as specified in the statute.

Court’s Reasoning

The Court of Appeals focused on the applicability of the newly enacted amendments to the ongoing eviction proceeding. The court emphasized that the amendments explicitly prevented the petitioners’ eviction because the tenants were in possession of the apartment when the statute became effective and met all three factors that now bar the eviction of rent-controlled tenants (age, length of residency, and disability). The court recognized that the landlord’s right to evict for personal use is now subordinate to the statutory protections afforded to vulnerable tenants. The court stated that the respondent conceded the applicability of the amendments. By remitting the matter, the court directed that the lower court consider the impact of Chapter 234 of the Laws of 1984, which codified these protections. The decision underscores a legislative intent to protect long-term, elderly, or disabled tenants from displacement, even when landlords seek the premises for their own use. There were no dissenting or concurring opinions published.