BROOKLYN, N.Y. (Legal Newsline) – New York Attorney General Letitia James says it was wrong for property owners fed up with the COVID-19 pandemic’s ban on evictions to sue her.
James’ office on March 23 filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, which was filed recently by five landlords hoping to strike down parts of the COVID-19 Emergency Eviction and Foreclosure Prevention Act.
The landlords sued James but not state health officials or the governor’s office. James says CEEFPA does not give her office any particularly duty to enforce it.
“The absence of an express grant of authority in the statute, although not dispositive, is highly relevant,” the motion says. “Nowhere in CEEFPA Part A is there any provision mandating, or even addressing, enforcement by the Attorney General.
“Indeed, CEEFPA Part A does not reference the Attorney General at all. CEEFPA is administered by the court system, which is prohibited by the statute until May 1, 2021, from accepting for filing any non-complying petition to commence an eviction proceeding, and is prohibited until May 1, 2021, from moving forward with pending proceedings, including issuance of eviction warrants, absent satisfaction of all statutory prerequisites.”
The state, like others, has banned evictions while families struggle to make rent during the pandemic.
CEEFPA is unconstitutional in at least five significant ways, the lawsuit says. Listed first is an allegation that it compels property owners to disseminate government messages with which they disagree.
“Property owners must distribute ‘hardship declaration’ forms drafted by the government to tenants…” the suit says. “In these forms, tenants are invited to take advantage of the eviction moratorium by checking a box stating… that the tenant is ‘experiencing financial hardship’ and therefore ‘unable to pay’ the rent owed due to COVID-19, or that vacating the premises would pose a ‘significant health risk.’”
Landlords must also hand out legal service providers who help tenants seeking to avoid eviction, the suit says, calling it compelled speech.
The suit also claims CEEFPA is vague, violates property owners’ procedural due process rights and violates the delegation of power under the state Constitution.