Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Short Term Rental Company Mistakenly Entered Tenant's Apartment

15 views

Published on

Short Term Rental Company Mistakenly Entered Tenant's Apartment


Tenant sued landlord in January 2010 after her possessions were mistakenly cleared out of her
apartment in August 2009 while she was on vacation. In November 2010, tenant added to the
lawsuit the real estate company that rented the apartment directly above hers. Tenant claimed
intentional infliction of emotional distress and forcible or unlawful entry. The real estate company
had sublet the upstairs apartment for short-term transient use.

Published in: Real Estate
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Short Term Rental Company Mistakenly Entered Tenant's Apartment

  1. 1. Short-Term Rental Company Mistakenly Entered Tenant's Apartment and Removed Possessions LVT Number: #27143 Tenant sued landlord in January 2010 after her possessions were mistakenly cleared out of her apartment in August 2009 while she was on vacation. In November 2010, tenant added to the lawsuit the real estate company that rented the apartment directly above hers. Tenant claimed intentional infliction of emotional distress and forcible or unlawful entry. The real estate company had sublet the upstairs apartment for short-term transient use. The person hired to clean the sublet unit instead entered tenant’s apartment and discarded her belongings. Several years later, after tenant had conducted 19 depositions, the real estate company asked to amend its defense to claim that tenant sued them too late for emotional distress and unlawful entry since her claim against them was made more than a year after the incident. The court refused to permit amendment of the real estate company’s answer since tenant had relied on the company’s position in pre-questioning witnesses. The court ruled that it wouldn’t condone “gotcha” litigation tactics. Makris v. Quartz Associates: Index No. 101022/2010, NYLJ No. 1202763223476 (Sup. Ct. NY; 7/11/16; Bluth, J)

×