Greene Org. LLC v Jones

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Greene Org. LLC v Jones 2021 NY Slip Op 31962(U) June 15, 2021 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: 508862/2020 Judge: Carolyn E. Wade Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York State and local government sources, including the New York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication. FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/30/2021 01:32 PM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 45 INDEX NO. 508862/2020 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/30/2021 At Part 84 of the. Supreme. Court of the State of New Y'cirk, held in and for the Co~nty of Kings, adhe Courthouse, located at Civic Center, · · Brooklyn; New York on · the l$th day of June 2021 PRESENT: HON. CAROLYNE. WADE~ Justice ------- .•-------- .-•-. ---. -- .. ---. ----- .•------- .--------- ·---------- . .--X dr~ene Organizatton LLC,, Plaintiff, Index No. .508 8(j2/2020 -againstORl)ER Joyce K Jones1..Tahjhae.A. Joi'les; Dayonrie Jones, John Doe and Jane Doe., representing any and all occupants of the entire Premises, Defendants . . -----------· ·- ·-------------------------. ----. - ----·. -· -------------- ·-- ·)( . Recitation, as requjred by CPLR§2~19(a), of the papers (!onsidered in the review of Plaintiffs,Motiori and Defendant Joyce joncs' Cross:-Motion: Papers Nmrtbereq Order to.Show Cause/Notice of Motion and Affidavits/Affirmations Annexed; ........................ 1, 2 Cro$S•MQtion and Affidavits/ Affirmations........... . Answering Affldavits/ Affirmations ........................ 3 Reply Affidavits/ Affirmations............................. . Me.m,prandum of ~~w.. ~ ........ 411 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Upon the. foreg;oing ..cited :paper$., and after oral argumentf..the .plaintiff Gt.eene ,Org·anization LLC. ("Piaintiff') :in.Q.v<;1s for a,i1 Orde1i gr~tihg it summary Judgment apd.a 1 of 4 INDEX NO. 508862/2020 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/30/2021 01:32 PM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 45 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/30/2021 default judgment against the defendants Joyce E. Jones, TahjhaeA; Jones, DayonneJones~ John Doe and/ane .Doe ("Defendants") (motion ~eq. #1). Defendant Joyce Jones, by cro~s:motion and in opposition, moves to dismiss the Complaint pursuant to CPLRRule 321 l(a)(l), (2), and (7), and321 l(e) on:the ground that Plaintlffhas failed to properly plead a cause ofactiqn, and improp,(;'!dy seeks relief in Sqpreme Ccnirt by a writ of assistance rather than proceeding in the Civil Court, Housing Part (motion seq. #2), The unqerlying ejectment action was cornmenced by Plaintiff, the new owner of a two-family dwelling located at 1187 Greene Avenue, Brooklyn, New York, a.:gainstthe Defendants, vvho reside at the premises. Plaintiff alleges in its Complaint that Defendants, inter alia, have;failed to pay.rent/use.and.occupancy?.andhave created a nuisance by accwn:ulating garbage; which has caused vermii1 arid insects to infestthe apartment. In. support ofits motion for summary judgment/default judgmentt Plaintiff asserts that the Defendants have not interposed an Answer; Tb,us; it .argues tj-iat they are in default, and are ,entitled to an entry of judgment against them pursuant to CPLR § 321.5. By cross.:motion.and in opposition, defedd~t JoyceJones argues that Plaintiff failed to properly plead acts of nuisance by Defendants with sufficient details, so that it can set forth a defense. She notes that Plaintiff datins that the Defendants have been a nuisance ·since the· onset.oftheittenancy. She also contendsth~t. there are.several factual inaccuracies in the pleadings; In particular, she points outthat the Surrtrriolis and Complaint indJcatc that .the,NYC D~paft:¢.ent b;fBuildings dete;tmined thatthe fo:st flqot and th.e·basemen.t of the Bubject premfaes were foo daQgerous•to ·occupy; However,. she asserts that the Defendants ' reside:d:only oh the se<;iohd flopr. PefendMt Joyce Jpnes tnainta,ins that the D~partmerttqf 2 of 4 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/30/2021 01:32 PM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 45 INDEX NO. 508862/2020 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/30/2021 Building's Order to R.epairNacate Order, .effective November 28, 2018, and the recorded viQlations that were issu~d pursuatit to Building Maintenance Code, did nbt Gdnceni their second floor residence. She also submits that she has. appeared, and that .a N0tice of Appearance has been submitted. to the court, which is sufficient to defeat the instant motion for a default judgment. :O~fendant Joyce Jones adds that upon the submission ofa hardship declaration, the COVID~l9 Emergency Eviction and Foreclosure Prevention Act of2020 stays ~II 111atters related toi•esidential cvi~tions through May 1, 2021. This Court credits Defendant Joyce Jones' assertion that the COVID-19 Emergency Eviction and Foreclostire Prevention Act of 2020~ which Governor Cuomo signed .into law on December 28,_ 2020; is applicable to this.matter; The Act provides that a resiqehtfal tenant's submission ofa "Tena11t''s Declaration QfHardship During the CdVID-19 Pandemic'' ("hardshipde<;laratfon''); which repbrts financial hardship on the account of the pandemic or exposure to significant health tiskto herself or hei· family, ifthey were required.. to vacate, will result in the stay ofaneviction matter (see Jacob Cram Coop v. Ziolkowski; 2021 NYLJ LEXIS 79 [Sup Ct,N.Y. Cty 2021] .[Act is applicable to ejectrnent casesJ) 1 Most rece~1tly, Governqr Cuqmo extended the stay from May l, 2021 to August 31, 2021. in the instant case, DefendantJoyce Jones, as well.as teriants/oi::cupants JayvonneLee, Nicole Berry, and Dannielle, Jones filed hardship declarations, dafodFebruary 20, .2021;.which were e-filed. Notably, the hardship de9htration statesthat"[y]o:umay stilt be ~yicted fqr violating your lease by persistently ·and unreasonably engagh1g in behavior thatsubstarttially infriQges on the use and ·enJoyment of other tenants; occupant$ or .causes a s:uostantial safetrhµa.rd to. ~ 3 of 4 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/30/2021 01:32 PM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 45 INDEX NO. 508862/2020 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/30/2021 r~g81'.dJug the sp~e;tfi,eaQts,.and their timeframes~ ·thus, this Cm.1tt finds that Defendants have nti>~ .e:ri~g~1n *ent1_p6rsi.stentacmtlty that falls·,~nder tlle.ntil~:~¢e,¢t~ti~n. .<tftfreA~t. Accordinglyt based upon·the,above, this action, includfog Pl1:1.intiffrs Motionfor s.mnmacy Judgn1enran,fDefend.ahtlt>yce 1ones' <3t9ss-Motion10 lD~mJ~ •'•sqiyed fhmugh .A6Mt'3l,.,·2021_ plll"Sllanf,fu -th~CQvm.. 1,emergency: Sviction and:Foreolosure Prevention Act of 2020. 4 4 of 4

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.