4848 Broadway Inv. LLC v Santana

[*1] 4848 Broadway Inv. LLC v Santana 2012 NY Slip Op 51735(U) Decided on September 7, 2012 Appellate Term, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on September 7, 2012
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Shulman, J.P., Hunter, Jr., Torres, JJ
570146/11.

4848 Broadway Investor LLC, Petitioner-Landlord-Respondent,

against

Danilo Santana, Respondent-Tenant, Jose Marte, Respondent-Undertenant-Appellant, Marte Garionex, Evelyn C. Marte, Francisco Marte, "John Doe" and/or "Jane Doe," Respondents-Undertenants.

Respondent Jose Marte appeals from a final judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Arlene H. Hahn, J.), entered July 29, 2010, upon a prior order which granted petitioner's motion for summary judgment on the possessory aspect of the holdover petition.

Per Curiam.

Final judgment (Arlene H. Hahn, J.), entered July 29, 2010, reversed, with $25 costs, petitioner's motion for summary judgment denied, and the matter remanded for further proceedings.

This licensee holdover proceeding is not ripe for summary disposition, since the record so far developed raises several material triable issues. For instance, it cannot presently be determined whether appellant, who appears to have long-term occupancy ties to the stabilized Manhattan apartment here at issue, timely asserted a succession claim at or about the time his sister, the original record tenant, permanently vacated the premises and, if so, whether appellant qualifies as a "first successor" (co-)tenant of his sister's tenancy entitled to a renewal lease in his own name (see Rent Stabilization Code [9 NYCRR] § 2522.8[b]; see generally Matter of MH Residential I, LLC v Keh, DHCR Admin. Review Docket No. VE 410038-R [Jan. 4, 2008]). Nor, on this record, was it conclusively shown that appellant waived his succession claim by any alleged inaction following his sister's vacatur and during the period of joint residency with his nephew, the person initially recognized by petitioner as the first successor.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
Decision Date: September 07, 2012