Police Forcibly Removed a Former Tenant from the Apartment Complex

[TekWiz]

Trespassing might just fall under "harassment", non?

The point was, there are legal ways for a landlord to make life rather difficult for the ex-tenant. If you'd prefer to believe otherwise, that's of course your prerogative.

Note too that "legal" by no means equates to "fair".

Well for one thing you'd have to actually be "trespassing." At it appears visiting an apartment in a building is not trespassing since the apartment owner has the authority/right to have guests. That authority/right supersedes a property managers dislike for a certain individual. In fact, let's say it's a co-op and the tenant owns the apartment. Then the issue would probably be up to the co-op board as well, not just the property manager. There would have to be a very good reason why an individual would not be allowed on the property, and the reason would have to be that they are posing some risk to the property or other tenants. The fact that it's a former tenant who was evicted doesn't necessarily mean they pose some risk. The property manager cannot exclude a person from entering a private apartment just because they have some personal dislike for them.

You say "there are legal ways for a landlord to make life rather difficult for the ex-tenant" but keep in mind that the ex-tenant is not a tenant anymore and has no legal contract with the landlord anymore. Making life "rather difficult" for someone is risky because one could be charged with harassment, and of course it's also immoral. I understand that a landlord could actually direct his/her revenge against the apartment owner/renter if they invite a guest the landlord doesn't like, and that clearly would be harassment against the tenant and a violation of their rights. I think there are also differences between small building with one landlord and co-ops who have a board of directors in how things like this might proceed. Of course, legal isn't always equal to fair, the law is often wrong and unfair, and in many cases judges don't even follow the law and make wrong, negligent, and even abusive decisions. Luckily there are laws protecting innocent people from harassment by others who happen not to like them and hopefully those laws are applied properly.

- - - Updated - - -

Have you personally read the order? Out here the language almost always includes an order to remain off the property - not simply to vacate the apartment.

And, again, what's the goal here? Whom do you want to sue?

Well the eviction order was specifically for the apartment, not the "property." I guess if it was a house the order would talk about the "property" but in an apartment building that would not be the case because the issue is the apartment itself, not the building. As I mentioned earlier, what if you owned another apartment there, or maybe a daycare for your child in the same building or even a doctor, medical center, psychiatrist, a dentist, a teacher, or a grocery store that you frequent or other business (this is common in New York) so that would not make much sense would it?

Well there is an open case against the police and it would nice to sue the landlord too.

[Dogmatique]

I strongly suggest you start making appointments with local attorneys ASAP.

[cdwjava]

Well the eviction order was specifically for the apartment, not the "property." I guess if it was a house the order would talk about the "property" but in an apartment building that would not be the case because the issue is the apartment itself, not the building.

Well, out here they often prohibit entry on to the entirety of the property when kicked out via eviction. If you have personally read the court order and that's what it says, so be it. But, as others have mentioned, there may well be other legal grounds by which they can remove a former tenant.

Have you spoken to any attorneys? What have they said? Do you have the money to sue the police and the landlord?

[TekWiz]

Well, out here they often prohibit entry on to the entirety of the property when kicked out via eviction. If you have personally read the court order and that's what it says, so be it. But, as others have mentioned, there may well be other legal grounds by which they can remove a former tenant.

Have you spoken to any attorneys? What have they said? Do you have the money to sue the police and the landlord?

There is an open case against the police with the comptroller. Didn't cost anything since it's a damages case. It takes a long time apparently. No case against the landlord due to no money, it's a different type of case. Maybe legal aid might agree...

Well even if the eviction includes the property, that would be for the eviction itself but the person could return later to visit someone in the building. According to this article here a landlord cannot monitor guests: http://homeguides.sfgate.com/can-lan...ing-56081.html and in Washington the law also allows visitors and it doesn't matter if they were formerly evicted: http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/if...en-189196.html

It would be inhumane to block a person who was evicted from visiting a friend in a building. There is no legal basis for it.

[cdwjava]

There is an open case against the police with the comptroller.

What does this entail? I don't believe we have this process out here. It sounds like it's merely about compensation for actual damages (like a door) but without any chance of an award for anything else as that would require a claim and a lawsuit.

Well even if the eviction includes the property, that would be for the eviction itself but the person could return later to visit someone in the building. According to this article here a landlord cannot monitor guests: http://homeguides.sfgate.com/can-lan...ing-56081.html and in Washington the law also allows visitors and it doesn't matter if they were formerly evicted: http://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/if...en-189196.html

It would be inhumane to block a person who was evicted from visiting a friend in a building. There is no legal basis for it.

An eviction is an order by the court. If the order - by a judge - says STAY AWAY, you stay away or risk jail.

Is there such language in the eviction order?

The link you provide has info info for states other than your own concerning eviction from a "specific" apartment (and, apparently, NOT from the property as a whole). This is why many such orders include language keeping the person off the property as it keeps the perceived problem child away.

[Disagreeable]

Grasping at points from around the country to desperately justify your position are we?

[TekWiz]

What does this entail? I don't believe we have this process out here. It sounds like it's merely about compensation for actual damages (like a door) but without any chance of an award for anything else as that would require a claim and a lawsuit.

An eviction is an order by the court. If the order - by a judge - says STAY AWAY, you stay away or risk jail.

Is there such language in the eviction order?

The link you provide has info info for states other than your own concerning eviction from a "specific" apartment (and, apparently, NOT from the property as a whole). This is why many such orders include language keeping the person off the property as it keeps the perceived problem child away.

I am really not sure about this but I suppose in NY such matters are related to the comptroller's office.

Well an eviction from an apartment means you are to be removed from the apartment and not come back into that apartment without a judge's order.

Well I guess it might depend on the reason for the eviction. I'm sure there are many cases of people being evicted for illegal activities and in those cases the landlord would have an interest in keeping them away from the grounds.

- - - Updated - - -

Grasping at points from around the country to desperately justify your position are we?

I guess you are just trying to be Disagreeable but since no one has come up with any specific law regarding New York I found some information on the subject in other states which could help in some way. I am not trying to prove a point, just trying to figure out if there is any specific law or rule covering this type of situation in NYC. So far no one has come up with any concrete information. Your comment is not constructive.

[Mr. Knowitall]

Landlord files for a restraining order and wants the person restrained from all of the landlord's property. That's a very simple, very cheap, and very legal way of accomplishing what he wants.

There are many, many possibilities here, and our dear OP is playing a game of indignation crossed with "hide the ball" on important facts. We're told that he knows nothing about what happened, all partial and second-hand, then he contends that he knows all and is telling all, and next he's making up fanciful scenarios of multiple apartments. While I was giving him the benefit of the doubt, that he is recounting the tenth of the story he knows crossed with conjecture, at this point I've concluded that he's not being straight with us. Either way, trying to address the scenario is a waste of time.

If the police let the person visit a tenant then later came back, kicked in the door, and hauled the tenant out, it's more than safe to say that they learned something about the tenant in between when they told him "you can visit that apartment" and when they pulled him out and told him to stay away from the apartment complex. A restraining order is a pretty good theory. It's possible that, as cdwjava suggests, the order of eviction prohibits him from entering the complex. The guy could also be a registered sex offender, with his being present at a location from which sex offenders in his risk category are forbidden, or in violation of his probation. But we have know way of knowing and our dear OP's request that we "assume" that the facts are that the guy is pure as the driven snow... is nothing but an invitation to waste our time.

Again, if the tenant doesn't care, and the ousted former tenant doesn't care, then nothing is going to change. If they do care, they can consult lawyers or come here to share all of the facts that the OP has omitted.

In any event, New York allows landlords to ban trespassers, and that broad prohibition can include any person not invited by a tenant to visit the premises even if they thing the tenant will be happy to see them when they knock on the door. Along with all of the other information we've not been given, we know nothing about what is in the lease or community rules about guests, former tenants, trespassers, or the right of the landlord to ban certain people from visiting tenants.

[cdwjava]

It'll be real simple ... if the evicted tenant interviews attorneys and one does cartwheels as he gets on the phone to make plans for that trip to Hawaii after he agrees to take the matter on contingency, the case is a winner. If he asks for ten grand up front, it's a loser.

I'm still curious to hear EXACTLY what the order says.

Oh, and, of course a person who is kicked off of the property can be told not to return and subject to arrest for trespassing. Whether that would justify forcing entry to an apartment and removing someone is something that will be specific to state law and may or may not exist.