From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Slutsky v. Roc-Le Triomphe Associates

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 9, 1987
129 A.D.2d 879 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Opinion

April 9, 1987

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Ulster County (Klein, J.).


Defendant moved for a change of venue pursuant to CPLR 510 in this action brought by plaintiffs, tenants under a lease agreement, concerning property located in New York County. The lease between the parties provided, inter alia, that plaintiffs have possession of a certain apartment at a monthly rental of $4,790 from July 1, 1984 to June 30, 1987. Plaintiffs' complaint states six causes of action, four requesting money damages, one asking for costs and disbursements and another seeking a declaratory judgment that the lease be terminated. Supreme Court found that termination of the lease would "affect the title to, or the possession, use or enjoyment of, real property" (CPLR 507). Therefore, Supreme Court directed that venue be changed as requested and that the Ulster County Clerk transmit all papers in the action to New York County. This appeal ensued.

There should be an affirmance. It has been held that a declaratory judgment action that "could affect a termination of the tenant's 'possession, use or enjoyment' or interest in the property" or "seek[s] to rescind the lease" is controlled by CPLR 507, which requires that a trial be held in a county where the property is located (Moschera Catalano v Advanced Structures Corp., 104 A.D.2d 306, 307; see also, Arnold Constable Corp. v Staten Is. Mall, 61 A.D.2d 826).

Paragraph 10 of plaintiffs' complaint asks for a declaration that "the lease has come to an end" and that plaintiffs have "no further obligations owing to the defendant". Clearly, plaintiffs have asked for a judgment which would "affect the title to, or the possession, use or enjoyment of, real property" (CPLR 507).

In view of our decision, we find it unnecessary to review the other issues raised on this appeal.

Order affirmed, with costs. Main, J.P., Casey, Weiss, Mikoll and Harvey, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Slutsky v. Roc-Le Triomphe Associates

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 9, 1987
129 A.D.2d 879 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)
Case details for

Slutsky v. Roc-Le Triomphe Associates

Case Details

Full title:ROBIN SLUTSKY et al., Appellants, v. ROC-LE TRIOMPHE ASSOCIATES, Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Apr 9, 1987

Citations

129 A.D.2d 879 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Citing Cases

Metro. N.Y. Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Am. v. Ics Found., Inc.

Adjudicating the validity of the leases between Eltingville and the charter schools will affect the…

Carder v. Ramos

CPLR 507 clearly states that: "The place of trial of an action in which the judgment demanded would affect…