First, INAL... but I do have quite a bit of experience of dealing with "difficult" landlords over the years over on the Left Coast. In a legal framework very like NY. Both for myself and friends. When people start telling terrible landlord stories I always win. One guy went to jail, for something unrelated, front page news story. The other guy hired notorious slumlord lawyers, that did not turn out well for him. It was really funny just how incredibly polite and accommodating he was for the next four years I rented his place.

In normal times my first reaction would be, so whats the full story, lets see how we might be able to make the problem go away. Its not a matter of winning or making a point, we just want the problem to go away. But at the moment? Well basically you are screwed if you want to push back against the mask rules. The fact a letter to vacate (or equivalent) has been sent by the landlord tells me that the simplest way out legally out of the current state and city "voluntary" regulations is long gone.

The ADA is so wide and vague that its usually very straightforward to intimate without having to provide actual evidence that you have a medical condition covered by the ADA that gives you an exemption. Dont know about NY state but in California the ADA related laws are so insane that ADA lawsuits are trivial to file, almost impossible to defend against, and as a result at least 95% of lawsuits are fraudulent. The judges know this but still the ADA complaints rarely fail. Title V is a great catch all.

Given how authoritarian, nasty and capricious current NY City and State rules regarding SAR 2 are, and that the Mayor (if you're in NYC) and governor are both such a combination of incompetence and vindictiveness you are probably in the worst possible place at the moment to try to defend yourself legally. All legal and regulatory avenues would be very heavily stacked against you. Without something like an ADA complaint you will lose. Pretty much guaranteed.

So in the short term you will have to wear a mask if you want to avoid being evicted. The landlord holds all the aces at the moment. You can try to subvert the stupidity by almost meaningless definition of what a mask actually is according to the Dept of Health. Its getting cold so a scarf over your mouth while in the elevator complies. As do a paper towel and a rubber band. I have a friend who shows their contempt for the current stupidity by wearing a suitable modified pair of underpants as a mask. Complies with the current regs..

In the medium term you should be able to work around the mask requirement with a bit of guile. Very much depends on the details of your situation but there is always a work around. If you want to get a good overview of renters law the Nolo Press books are a great place to start. The will at least give you a good idea of how the relevant law works..

But during the current mass hysteria there is no point trying to make any kind of "statement" about just how stupid and pointless these mask requirements are. You are dealing with literally unreasonable people. There is nothing to be gained and its not worth risk losing where you live.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. There are legal ways to deal with this stupidity but it involves fighting on a very different battle field and with very different laws. It involves taking out and neutralizing legally the mid level people in local government. The only people usually amenable to this sort of legal pressure. This is always a long game. And will not help with your current situation in the short term.

Thanks for your reply. More background (which I don't think would alter anything in your response): I live in a co-op, a form of apartment ownership that is very common in NYC, less so elsewhere. And, yes, I'm in NYC, and while you're correct about it being led by the most vile people imaginable right now, the one bright spot for me is that landlord tenant courts tend to be extremely tenant friendly, plus I know that for many New Yorkers, there is currently a moratorium on evictions.

That said, apart from the obvious reasons why the rule is stupid - it has no real safety effects - the co-op board does not get involved in regulating the health of the tenants in other ways. The house rules do not require tenants to be vaccinated against, well, anything. The tenants are not required to notify the board if their children get chicken pox. I think that pets need to be vaccinated, but I don't think the board has ever checked anyone's pet for that. Since they turn a blind eye to all these other communicable diseases, why are they coming down like a ton of bricks on a disease that has a 99% recovery rate? While there are plenty of senior citizens in my building (hello, Upper East Side), there's nothing to stop them from sheltering in place.

And, yes, I am a lawyer myself, but I'm also smart enough to realize that I'm not a specialist in either landlord/tenant rights or in the sort of rights that are being curtailed by our current regime. I have trouble imagining that these new rules, and their method of enforcement, would stand up in court, but I need someone to guide me through the process.

Thanks for all the extra info. For a start its a huge help that you have a legal background. I couched my original reply assuming that you were a "civilian" so to speak. As I said I am not a lawyer but because of my day job and my career I have been exposed to quite a bit of the legal process over the years. Usually as an expert witness etc. Because of my day job I always approached the law in various countries and states as a rather interesting puzzle to be solved. Saying that I have always lived by adage - that someone who represents themselves has a fool for a client - but have found in any of the normal legal confrontations of daily life the very act of showing that you have a basic familiarity with the law is usually enough to make the other side fold. If you have done your basic research. But I am always very aware of trying not to fall into the Barrack Room Lawyer trap.

Although only ever a West Coast person I am very familiar with the NYC rental / real estate scene. I came very close to moving to your neighborhood about twenty years ago. I got lots of very useful advice at the time from friends who were NYC natives. So familiar with co-op's, management boards etc and the city and state laws and ordinances which make California and SF look like a bastion of sanity in comparison. Also heard all the gory details of co-op management board politics from a good friend who got himself elected to the board of his building because one person in the building was making everyone elses life hell. The board battles in that building have now being going on for more than a decade.

I believe the legal framework for co-ops in NY is pretty much the same as elsewhere. That as long as a rule / regulation / bylaw made by the co-op board does not violate city, state or Federal law they can pretty much do whatever they want. I dont believe there is any real Reasonableness test in this situation.

Now in normal times a co-op board demanding masks in public areas would violate a whole slew of laws but as both the City and State Health Boards have made a series of public health regulations on the subject of wearing masks in public areas pretty much all traditional avenues usually available would appear to be blocked. Now the fact that the regulations use the word "should" rather than "must" very much works in their favor not yours. My guess would be even though the actual science and all the published data is on your side, and can be amply demonstrated from reputable published scientific sources, that in the current situation of mass hysteria it would be irrelevant when it came to the final outcome.

I am unfamiliar with the NY law but I know in California that once an epidemic is declared a public health emergency that local and state authorities have draconian powers that go way beyond even what is available even in wartime. And pretty much all the case law is in the favor of the authorities in what they do. And if lower informal legal authorities act in manner that is conforming to what the authorities are saying...

If I was in your position the first thing I would look for is not a rental law specialist but a NYC co-op law specialist. Because I suspect that might be you best chance of any success with the mask in elevator rule. To get some flexibility from the co-op board. If there was any chance of delivering a plausible ADA case for not wearing a mask the co-op board is the probably the best target for such an approach. Given New Yorkers notoriously litigious nature I am sure there must a reasonable healthy eco-system in NYC of lawyers who specialize in co-op property law. Just someone who you could run your story past and would give you an honest assessment of your chances of prevailing. Because in the current situation I would not expect any of the city agencies such as the rental court to give you any kind of favorable hearing.

Given that you're a lawyer you should be able work out something that gets you to a successful outcome. You already know that the most direct route from A to B in legal terms is usually a very convoluted zig-zag. Thats usually the most difficult concept for people who are not familiar with the law to understand. That its not a matter of winning, its a matter of the other side stopping or going away. And the way to get to that conclusion is always a zig zag path.

So best of luck. Sometimes the best way of getting the desired end result is to find a way of subverting the situation. Which very much depends of the situation and personalities involved. I have found that tactic works very successfully in the past. I once helped a former landlord end a nuisance lawsuit that had been going on for years brought by the people he had sold the property to by preparing a written deposition, a statement of fact, that shut down all possible potential future counter claims by the other sides lawyer. It worked.