Propertyconstructive evictionpartial constructive evictionpartial actual evictionabandonmentrent suspensionresidential tenantuninhabitable terrace
Facts
The tenant leased an apartment with a terrace, and the terrace was a prime factor inducing the lease. From early 1965, green fluid and water overflow from the central air conditioner and ash from the incinerator fell onto the terrace in significant quantities, rendering it effectively unusable for its intended purposes. The tenant and his family promptly abandoned the terrace but continued to live in the apartment until the end of July 1966, when they vacated and refused to pay rent for the final four months of the lease. The landlord later sued for that rent, while the tenant sought to rely on eviction principles and recover his security deposit.
Issue
Whether New York law recognizes partial constructive eviction when a landlord's misconduct renders only part of leased residential premises uninhabitable and the tenant abandons that part but continues to occupy the remainder. Also, whether the tenant here was constructively evicted from the entire apartment or only from the terrace.
Rule
A residential tenant may establish partial constructive eviction when the landlord is responsible for conditions that render part of the leased premises uninhabitable and the tenant promptly abandons that part. Full constructive eviction still requires abandonment of the entire premises with reasonable promptness, but abandonment of only the unusable portion can support partial constructive eviction with the same legal consequences as partial actual eviction, including the right to stop paying rent from the time of the partial eviction.
🔒
See the holding & full analysis
Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.
The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case
One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.
Nina Alvarez rents an apartment in Brooklyn that includes a roof deck specifically listed in the lease. After the building owner installs faulty exhaust equipment, greasy residue and soot regularly coat the deck, making it unusable for sitting, dining, or drying clothes. Nina immediately stops using the deck but continues living inside the apartment and later withholds rent.
If the owner sues for unpaid rent, what is the strongest argument for Nina under the governing rule?
Explanation. The majority recognized partial constructive eviction for residential tenants when the landlord is responsible for conditions rendering part of the premises uninhabitable and the tenant promptly abandons that part. The tenant's continued occupancy of the remainder defeats full constructive eviction, but not partial constructive eviction. The opinion further states that partial constructive eviction carries the same consequences as partial actual eviction, including the right to stop paying rent from the time of the partial eviction. (Derived from East Haven Associates v. Gurian (n.d.).)