N.Y. Real Property Law § 215

RPL § 215: no removal without good cause

Real Property Law § 215 forbids removing a tenant from covered housing - by eviction, exclusion or non-renewal - except for good cause under § 216.

Official text N.Y. Real Property Law § 215 — New York

* § 215. Necessity for good cause. No landlord shall, by action to evict or to recover possession, by exclusion from possession, by failure to renew any lease, or otherwise, remove any tenant from housing accommodations covered by section two hundred fourteen of this article except for good cause as defined in section two hundred sixteen of this article.

* NB Repealed June 15, 2034

Text as published in the 2026 snapshot of the code.

Source: Vaquill Open US Law, compiled from official state publishers (huggingface.co), reproduced under license CC BY 4.0.

Read this provision at the official source →

What it actually says

Two lines that change the default. No landlord shall, by action to evict or to recover possession, by exclusion from possession, by failure to renew any lease, or otherwise, remove any tenant from housing accommodations covered by § 214 except for good cause as defined in § 216.

The four routes named in the sentence are what make it hard to work around. The obvious one is an eviction proceeding. But refusing to renew a lease is also a removal for this purpose, and so is exclusion from possession, and so is anything else - "or otherwise". For a covered unit, the end of the lease term is no longer, by itself, a reason for the tenancy to end.

The section is a hinge, not a self-contained rule. It depends on two other sections: § 214 says which housing accommodations are covered, and § 216 says what good cause is. Coverage is the first question in every dispute about this article, and it turns on things the tenant may not know - the size of the portfolio, the rent level, whether the local government opted in. Section 218 makes the rights in the article non-waivable. The published text carries a note: repealed June 15, 2034.

When it applies

  • A tenant in a covered unit is told the lease will simply not be renewed at the end of the term.
  • A landlord in a covered building seeks possession without stating a ground.
  • A tenant is excluded from the apartment without a court order.
  • A landlord treats the expiry of the lease as automatically ending the right to stay.

What this section does not say

  • It does not say which homes are covered. That is § 214, and coverage is where most of these disputes actually begin.
  • It does not list the grounds. Good cause is defined in § 216, which sets out ten of them.
  • It does not mean a tenant can never be removed. It means a ground must be established in court.
  • It does not apply forever - the published text notes repeal on June 15, 2034.
  • It does not affect the notice requirements in §§ 226-c, 232-a and 232-b, which run alongside it.

Worked examples

Invented situations, written to show how the wording bites. They are not real cases, not judgments and not precedent, and nothing here predicts what would happen in yours.

Illustrative example

A tenant of four years is told the lease will simply not be renewed at the end of the term, with no reason offered, in a building the tenant believes is covered by the good cause law.

How the wording applies

Failure to renew a lease is one of the four routes the section names, alongside an action to evict, exclusion from possession and "or otherwise", so for a covered unit the end of the term is no longer by itself a reason for the tenancy to end. But the section is a hinge rather than a self-contained rule: it turns on coverage under § 214, which depends on things like the size of the portfolio, the rent level and whether the local government opted in.

How the parties settled it

They agree to establish coverage first from the ownership and rent figures both of them can see, and the landlord holds off serving anything for sixty days while that is done.

Illustrative example

A landlord who believes a tenancy is over changes the barrel of the lock while the tenant is at work, on the basis that the lease expired last month.

How the wording applies

The section names exclusion from possession as a removal in its own right, so an expired lease does not turn a lockout into something else where the unit is covered - removal requires good cause as defined in § 216, established in a proceeding. Coverage under § 214 is still the fact that decides whether the article applies at all.

How the parties settled it

The lock is restored the same day at the landlord's cost, and both agree that any question about the tenancy is raised by written notice rather than at the door.

Illustrative example

A landlord and a prospective tenant negotiating a long lease want to understand what the good cause regime means for a term that would run into the middle of the next decade.

How the wording applies

The published text carries a note that the article is repealed on June 15, 2034, so a tenancy running past that date cannot assume these protections continue. The section says nothing about tenancies that straddle the date, so what it turns on for these two is how they choose to allocate that risk now.

How the parties settled it

They agree a term ending before that date with an option to renew on terms to be discussed nearer the time, so neither is betting on what the statute book looks like in a decade.

Related sections

N.Y. Real Property Law § 216 Good cause eviction grounds: N.Y. Real Property Law § 216 N.Y. Real Property Law § 218 RPL § 218: a tenant cannot sign away good cause eviction protection N.Y. Real Property Law § 226-c Five percent rent notice: N.Y. Real Property Law § 226-c N.Y. Real Property Law § 223-b No Retaliatory Eviction: N.Y. Real Property Law § 223-b

That's the law. Now let's settle your problem.

Say what is happening. A neutral mediator hears your side and the other party's, and walks you both to a written agreement. In the advanced settings you can ask for the decision to be reasoned on the New York Consolidated Laws.

This is with

Or open a session directly and invite the other party.

We copy this text from the official publisher and re-check it against that source on every page load, but we cannot guarantee it is complete, current or free of error, and we accept no liability for any reliance on it. An amendment can take effect before a consolidation catches up. The publisher's own copy is linked below; where the two differ, it is the official one that counts.

This page reproduces the text of N.Y. Real Property Law § 215 in force at the date shown and explains it in general terms. It is not legal advice and takes no account of the circumstances of your case, which can change the answer completely. For a live dispute, for limitation periods, and before taking any step in court, consult a qualified lawyer in New York.

← All New York law pages