Best Real Estate Lawyers in Brooklyn NY Secure Commercial

The client retained counsel after informal negotiations and payment demands failed to resolve the dispute.

Although the lease remained formally in place, the tenant had not paid rent for approximately twelve months, creating ongoing financial strain.

The landlord also incurred additional expenses, including utilities and maintenance costs, to prevent deterioration of the commercial space.

Recognizing that continued tolerance would weaken legal standing, the client sought immediate legal intervention.

Under New York law, a commercial landlord may terminate a lease and seek possession when a tenant materially breaches payment obligations.

Chronic nonpayment, especially when it extends over multiple months, constitutes a substantial default.

When voluntary surrender does not occur, a landlord may initiate a court proceeding to recover possession and enforce the tenant’s obligation to vacate.

Experienced counsel ensures that notice requirements, filing procedures, and evidentiary standards are properly satisfied.

The original lease was executed approximately three years before litigation, with a substantial security deposit and a fixed monthly rent.

At the tenant’s request, occupancy was later transferred to a related individual, who assumed operational control of the premises.

While the substitution did not alter the landlord’s ownership rights, it complicated day to day communications and delayed enforcement efforts.

Counsel clarified that the tenant and the actual occupant were both responsible under the governing agreements.

Over a twelve month period, no rent payments were made, despite repeated reminders and informal accommodations.

The landlord was forced to cover utilities and related expenses to preserve the property and comply with safety obligations.

This prolonged default not only reduced cash flow but also exposed the property to risk of deterioration.

These facts supported a clear showing of material breach and justified lease termination.

Counsel argued that the lease had been lawfully terminated due to nonpayment and that continued occupancy was unauthorized.

Because the tenant failed to cure the default within a reasonable time, the landlord was entitled to immediate possession.

The court was asked to order the occupants to vacate and return control of the premises to the owner.

This argument rested on well established principles of New York commercial landlord tenant law.

In response, the tenant alleged that property conditions and prior repair issues justified withholding rent and claimed substantial renovation costs.

However, evidence showed that the tenant had agreed to bear the cost of business related improvements at the outset.

No contemporaneous complaints or formal repair demands were documented during the lease term.

As a result, the court found that these allegations did not excuse nonpayment or defeat the landlord’s right to possession.