New York Civil Service Attorney Law Blog : New York Civil Service Lawyer & Attorney : Kevin P. Sheerin : Article 78 : Serving New York City, Long Island, Manhattan, Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island

Matter of Flores-Tully v City of New York Department of Housing Preservation and Development

Petitioner brought about this Article 78 appeal to review a determination of the City of New York Department of Housing Preservation and Development denying petitioner’s application for succession rights to an apartment owned by Dayton Tower’s Corporation. The Supreme Court denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding which resulted in this appeal.

Petitioner claims that the decision was arbitrary and capricious and lacked a rational basis. The Court disagrees because petitioner was never named on the income affidavits filed for the apartment prior to the tenant of record’s death. Though the tenant was petitioner’s husband, Dayton was never notified of her occupancy. Additionally, she filed income affidavits that showed she occupied another apartment unit in the same building.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court affirmed the determination, with one bill of costs.

Read more about this Article 78 housing case here.

To read about more Article 78 cases go to http://www.sheerinlaw.com/?id=78.

For other interesting information in the personal injury file go to www.negligenceatty.com.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Matter of Yasmeen Lugo v The New York City Housing Authority

Petitioner, Yasmeen Lugo, was the sole authorized tenant for her apartment in a New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) public housing development. According to NYCHA, Petitioner allowed illegal drug transactions to occur in her apartment and was chronically delinquent on her rent payments. These issues caused NYCHA to charge Petitioner with non-desirability, breach of rules and regulations, endangering the welfare of a child, and chronic rent delinquency. After a hearing, NYCHA recommended terminating Petitioner’s tenancy. Petitioner argued that she had no knowledge of any illegal drug dealing activities by her two friends that often stayed in her apartment. The Board adopted the hearing officer’s decision and terminated Petitioner’s tenancy. Petitioner then commenced this Article 78 appeal.

CPLR 7803 states that the court review of a determination of an agency should only be regarding whether or not the determination was made in violation of lawful procedure or was arbitrary and capricious. In this case the decision for termination of tenancy was based on substantial evidence and the Court found no reason in the record to annul the NYCHA’s decision. The Petitioner’s assertion that she was unaware of any illegal drug transactions in her apartment is not sufficient to overcome the other evidence presented at the hearing.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court denied the petition.

Read more about this Article 78 Housing Authority appeal.

To read about more Article 78 cases go to http://www.sheerinlaw.com/?id=78.

For other interesting information in the personal injury file go to www.negligenceatty.com.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Matter of Anne Baldwin v Tino Hernandez, as Chairman and Member of the NYC Housing Authority

Petitioner brought about this Article 78 proceeding to review a determination from the New York City Housing Authority that permanently excluded her son from her public housing apartment.

The reasons behind the Housing Authority’s condition that petitioner may continue tenancy on exclusion of her son for non-desirability were supported by substantial evidence, and not arbitrary and capricious. Petitioner’s son pleaded guilty to assault, threatening two Housing Authority employees, and harassing a former supervisor. These instances all supported the Housing Authority’s decision showing that the exclusion was appropriate and not shocking to the conscience.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court confirmed the determination, denied the petition, and dismissed the proceeding.

Read more about this Article 78 NYC housing authority appeal.

To read about more Article 78 cases go to http://www.sheerinlaw.com/?id=78.

For other interesting information in the personal injury file go to www.negligenceatty.com.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Matter of Vazquez v New York City Housing Authority

Petitioner, Anita Vazquez, commenced this Article 78 appeal against the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) to review the determination terminating her public housing tenancy on the ground of nondesirability. Petitioner was charged with chronic rent delinquency and later non-desirability based on charges of unauthorized use of an ATM card. The decision to termination petitioner’s tenancy was in response to her guilty plea to this felony offense.

The penalty imposed on petitioner was disproportionate to the offense considering that petitioner is current in all rent due, has a source of income from SSI and public assistance, and has paid full restitution to the complaining witness and complied with the conditions of her probation. Additionally, petitioner has no prior criminal record and her criminal conduct was an isolated occurrence. Terminating petitioner’s tenancy considering her specific circumstances is shocking to the judicial conscience and sense of fairness.

Accordingly, the Court vacated the penalty of termination and remanded respondent for imposition of a lesser penalty.

Read article here.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link