City of New York v Stewart

[*1] City of New York v Stewart 2004 NY Slip Op 51069(U) Decided on September 22, 2004 Appellate Term, Second 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 22, 2004
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE TERM : 2nd and 11th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT:PESCE, P.J., ARONIN and PATTERSON, JJ.
x

THE CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondent, NO. 2003-894 K C DECIDED

against

JOYCE STEWART, Appellant, -and- "JOHN DOE" & "JANE DOE', Undertenants. x

Appeal by tenant from an order of the Civil Court, Kings County (O. Chin. J.), entered March 19, 2003, substituting "the City of New York" for "320 Sterling Street Associates, Net Lessee" as petitioner, deemed an appeal from the final judgment, entered on April 14, 2003, awarding possession to the City of New York (see CPLR 5520 [c]).

Final judgment unanimously affirmed without costs.

320 Sterling Street Associates, Net Lessee (Sterling) commenced this nonpayment proceeding against Joyce Stewart (tenant) to recover $16,886 in rent arrears for apartment 2CW (premises) at 320 Sterling Street, Brooklyn, NY. Thereafter, in May 2002, by stipulation of settlement, the parties agreed that a portion of the arrears would be waived, and Sterling would be awarded possession of the premises, if tenant voluntarily surrendered said premises by November 15, 2002. In October 2002, the City of New York's Department of Housing and Preservation Development (HPD) moved to restore the matter to the calendar and, pursuant to CPLR 1021, substitute "The City of New York" (the City) as petitioner in place of Sterling. In support of the motion, the City asserted, inter alia, that it owned the building known as 320 Sterling Street, Brooklyn, NY (building), that the net lease agreement it had with Sterling to manage said building was terminated as of August 15, 2002, and that tenant was informed, by [*2]letter dated August 14, 2002, that HPD would resume management duties of the building as of August 16, 2002. Counsel for tenant argued in opposition, inter alia, that this court's decision in City of New York v Stewart (NYLJ, Apr. 10, 1998) barred the instant action pursuant to the doctrine of collateral estoppel. Thereafter, the court below granted the motion and a final judgment awarding possession of the premises to the City was entered on April 14, 2003.

The doctrine of collateral estoppel bars re-litigation of issues of ultimate fact between the same parties, which issues have been determined by a prior valid final judgment. Contrary to defendant's contention, however, collateral estoppel is not applicable herein since the issues in the case at bar are not identical to those in the City of New York v Stewart case decided in 1998. Tenant's remaining contentions lack merit. Accordingly, inasmuch as the City is the successor in interest to Sterling, the court below properly substituted it for Sterling as petitioner.
Decision Date: September 22, 2004