Moved Out Over a Year Ago, Ex-Roommate is Suing for Rent

My question involves landlord-tenant law in the State of: New York

Hi all, thanks for looking.

Here are the facts to my situation:
In July 2011 my now wife moved out of an apartment she was sharing with someone to move in with me.
The person she was living with was the original renter of the unit (lease signed in April 2011), my wife signed onto the lease later (May 2011).
No paper work was done at the time she moved out and the person she was sharing the unit with did not make any request for her to continue to pay rent.
I received notice yesterday that her ex-room mate, not the landlord, is suing her for rent until April 2012 when the lease ended.

Here are the "extras" in my situation
My wife was romantically involved with her room-mate at the time she moved in with me.
The ex-room mate has since moved back in with his wife.
My suspicion is that the ex-room mates wife is the driving force behind this legal action.

My question is basically this:
if after she moved out and the original tenant (room-mate) resumed paying the full portion of the rent, does he now, a year later, have any legal right to try and get money from her? I could understand that if the landlord was suing her there would definitely be legal obligation because the lease was signed. But since it is her ex-room mate trying to recoup some money that he has already paid I am not as certain on this situation.

Any input is appreciated,

Thank you.

Quote:

---

if after she moved out and the original tenant (room-mate) resumed paying the full portion of the rent, does he now, a year later, have any legal right to try and get money from her?

---

generally, yes.

Quote:

---

I could understand that if the landlord was suing her there would definitely be legal obligation because the lease was signed.

---

actually if the remaining tenant paid the entire rent due, the LL would have no action. All the LL was due was the total amount of rent. They do not care who pays it. There is no "his share" and "her share" when concerned with the rent due the landlord. The only time "your share" and "my share" comes into play is between co-tenants. If the remaining tenant failed to pay the rent, the LL could have actually come after your friend for the entire amount of rent due to the rent being a joint and several debt.

She is liable for her agreed share of the rent to her co-tenant. The only argument she has is that the co-tenant agreed to release her from any liability for the rent upon moving out. If he did, then she can tell the guy that he released her from any liability. If he didn't, then she continued to be a named tenant with all rights of tenancy and the liability for the rent that goes along with that. Just because she chose to live elsewhere does not in itself release her from liability for the rent in that apartment.

Quote:

---

Here are the "extras" in my situation
My wife was romantically involved with her room-mate at the time she moved in with me.
The ex-room mate has since moved back in with his wife.
My suspicion is that the ex-room mates wife is the driving force behind this legal action.

---

All completely irrelevant to the issue at hand. None of this has any bearing on whether or not your wife owes the rent.

Unless your wife's ex-roommate signed a document releasing her from liability for the remainder of the lease - and it sounds like he did not - your wife is on the hook.

Thanks for the fast replies. My next question is how is her liability, or specifically how much she owes, established?

If the practice was that each co-tenant would pay half, then that's evidence of the agreement. I expect both roommates would also testify about the agreement as to how rent was to be split.

Thanks again for the reply. My next question is can she be held liable for utilities? Also, would she be entitled to her security deposit as the lease was not broken?

Quote:

---

My next question is can she be held liable for utilities?

---

Since she wasn't using them, this is unlikely.

Quote:

---

Also, would she be entitled to her security deposit as the lease was not broken?

---

The security deposit may be retained for unpaid rent.

Quote:

---

Quoting LawResearcherMissy

---

The security deposit may be retained for unpaid rent.

---

from what has been stated, the rent has been paid. OP is actually a co-lessee so I presume the deposit spoken of is one paid to the LL. As such, unless there is some other reason for the LL to retain the deposit, OP should get their deposit back. Co-tenant cannot claim such a deposit for rent.

Quote:

---

Quoting Mr. Knowitall

---

If the practice was that each co-tenant would pay half, then that's evidence of the agreement. I expect both roommates would also testify about the agreement as to how rent was to be split.

---

How would this matter be resolved in court if the two roommates had differing accounts of what the rental agreement was and there was no documentation to support either claim?

first, the plaintiff is charged with proving their case with at least a preponderance of the evidence (more than 50% in their favor). If this is in small claims court, the judge can utilize their perceived veracity of the parties to make a determination. Obviously if there are opposing stories somebody is lying. The judge has the right to determine who is lying even without solid evidence of that fact.

Quote:

---

Quoting Mr. Knowitall

---

If the practice was that each co-tenant would pay half, then that's evidence of the agreement. I expect both roommates would also testify about the agreement as to how rent was to be split.

---

General question regarding this: Why would it be that splitting the rent for 2 months, then not splitting the rent for 10 months establishes an agreement that rent should have been split all the time? It seems that there was 5 times more of the second behavior so that would be what establishes the pattern

Quote:

---

Quoting ajnewman

---

General question regarding this: Why would it be that splitting the rent for 2 months, then not splitting the rent for 10 months establishes an agreement that rent should have been split all the time? It seems that there was 5 times more of the second behavior so that would be what establishes the pattern

---

just because he did not demand the rent from your gf does not mean the contract she pays 1/2 the rent was terminated. She accrued her 1/2 share of the rent every month she didn't pay it.

It comes down to: was there or wasn't there some agreement she pay 1/2 of the rent upon signing the lease?

From the facts stated and discussed thus far, can anyone suggest if it be worthwhile to pursue legal representation or is it likely that doing so will just result in having to pay attorney fees on top of whatever judgement may be rendered adding up to a larger sum than if we had just paid the full claim initially (~4k$).

Also, in small claims court, can you make a counter offer to try to settle out of court? If you do this and they don't accept can they use that against you in the hearing as an admission of liability?

Quote:

---

ajnewman;622575]From the facts stated and discussed thus far, can anyone suggest if it be worthwhile to pursue legal representation or is it likely that doing so will just result in having to pay attorney fees on top of whatever judgement may be rendered adding up to a larger sum than if we had just paid the full claim initially (~4k$).

---

first, haven't checked but many states do not even allow lawyers in small claims. Check that out before considering it any further. Then, chances are she will lose. The only real question is how much the judgment will be. Adding lawyers fees on top of a relatively small amount will basically just mean she pays more but still loses. Unless the lawyer could win or at least reduce the amount of the award to match his fees, she loses more with a lawyer. Most likely she would not benefit from a lawyer.

Quote:

---

Also, in small claims court, can you make a counter offer to try to settle out of court?

---

absolutely. In fact, most SCC prefer you do make an attempt.

Quote:

---

If you do this and they don't accept can they use that against you in the hearing as an admission of liability?

---

Nope because it isn't. It is an attempt to settle the case without going to court which means nothing as far as liability goes.