Lafayette Boynton Hsg. Corp. v Pickett

[*1] Lafayette Boynton Hsg. Corp. v Pickett 2014 NY Slip Op 51288(U) Decided on August 22, 2014 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 August 22, 2014
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Shulman, J.P., Hunter, Jr., Ling-Cohan,JJ.
570138/13

Lafayette Boynton Hsg. Corp., Petitioner-Landlord-Appellant, -

against

Ronald Pickett, Respondent-Tenant-Respondent.

Landlord appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Javier E. Vargas, J.), dated October 8, 2013, which conditionally granted tenant's motion to be restored to possession upon payment to landlord of $14,030.58 by a specified date.

Per Curiam.

Order (Javier E. Vargas, J.), dated October 8, 2013, affirmed, without costs.

Under the particular facts and circumstances of record in this nonpayment summary proceeding, we are not prepared to say that Civil Court abused its discretion in vacating the warrant and conditionally restoring the long-term (46-year), disabled and infirm tenant to possession of the subject stabilized apartment upon his payment in two-week's time of the remainder of all rent arrears, eviction costs and attorney's fees then due landlord (see 102-116 Eighth Ave. Assoc., L.P. v Oyola, 299 AD2d 296 [2002]; Parkchester Apts. Co. v Scott, 271 AD2d 273 [2001]; see also Harvey 1390 LLC v Bodenheim, 96 AD3d 664 [2012]). Good cause sufficient to warrant the requested relief was provided by several factors, most notably the tenant's tender of a substantial portion of the arrears and his showing of various agency commitments of funds on the return date of the application giving rise to the order under review (cf. 100 W. 174 LLC v Daley, 37 Misc 3d 139[A], 2012 NY Slip Op 52232[U][App Term, 1st Dept 2012]). And while there was delay in the resolution of the landlord's rent claim, it appears that landlord itself contributed to a portion of the delay by misplacing several Department of Social Services checks tendered on tenant's behalf, checks which needed to be and eventually were reissued. Moreover, in the final analysis, the protracted nature of the proceedings, although understandably a source of frustration for the landlord, did not warrant the forfeiture of this tenancy, particularly given the tenant's good faith, ultimately successful efforts to make the landlord whole by securing emergency rental assistance and tendering the full rent arrears and litigation costs, including attorney's fees, owed to and incurred by landlord.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concurI concurI concur
Decision Date: August 22, 2014