Q about terminating a sublease

See http://www.streeteasy.com/nyc/talk/discussion/2845-pls-help-me-understand-evictionsrisks

If there are no termination clauses, it is because you cannot terminate. It is not contemplated by the lease which is essentially a type of contract. Work something out with the overtenant to avoid the uncertainty, headache and cost of litigation, damage to your credit score, and ability to ever rent again.

Search other posts as this question has been asked a couple of times recently.

This question has been asked and answered several times. Only thing I have to add is that Real Property Law 226-b, which as I and others have mentioned, provides the statutory scheme for subletting or being released from a lease, does not apply to co-op apts like yours.

Try to sublet.

A third degree sublet...good luck.

I would offer the prime tenant a buyout. Perhaps for two months rent they may be willing to let you out of your lease.

Did the prime tenant obtain consent from the landlord?

Interesting question, leasinglawyer. I see where you're going.

There may be some confusion re whether skulk himself is a sublessee, or whether the over/undertenant language in the lease is just the "overtenant's" misuse of legal jargon.

So, skulk - are you subleasing your apt, or did you rent it directly from the owner?

Mel: It seems to me that, even if this is not a sub-sublease (I have seen sub-sub-sub-subleases in the commercial context) this is a coop and as such, the owner would be the tenant/sublessor and the coop would be the overlandlord. If the tenant/sublessor did not obtain consent (at any level) to the subletting, skulk may have some leverage.

The way I read it...

Coop = Landlord
Shareholder = Tenant
Skulk = Sub Tenant or Skulk = screwed

Aboutready should be able to advise us on this one. Aboutready what do you think?