Sugar Hill Prop. Veh. I, LLC v Ashley

[*1] Sugar Hill Prop. Veh. I, LLC v Ashley 2013 NY Slip Op 50773(U) Decided on May 14, 2013 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 May 14, 2013
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Lowe, III, P.J., Shulman, Hunter, Jr., JJ
12-169.

Sugar Hill Property Vehicle I, LLC, Petitioner-Respondent,

against

Colin Ashley, Respondent-Appellant.

Respondent Colin Ashley appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Cheryl J. Gonzales, J.), dated September 30, 2011, which granted petitioner's motion for summary judgment of possession in a holdover summary proceeding and denied respondent's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the petition.

Per Curiam

Order (Cheryl J. Gonzales, J.), dated September 30, 2011, affirmed, with $10 costs.

In opposition to petitioner's prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on the holdover petition, appellant failed to establish any basis for his continued occupancy of the subject stabilized apartment. Notably, the leasehold of the record tenant (Saleh) was properly terminated pursuant to a(n) (unappealed) final judgment issued in favor of petitioner in a prior summary eviction proceeding, and Saleh's tenancy is no longer in issue. With respect to appellant, neither the prior building owner's apparent knowledge of appellant's occupancy in the apartment - as Saleh's roommate - nor the acceptance by petitioner or its predecessor of appellant's rent payments was sufficient, on this record and without more, to confer full stabilization protection upon appellant, or to require a trial on the issue. Any month-to-month tenancy created by appellant's tenders of rent (see Real Property Law § 232-c) was properly terminated by way of the 30-day notice served herein by petitioner (see Real Property Law § 232-a; Weiden v 926 Park Ave. Corp., 154 AD2d 308, 308-309 [1989]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT. [*2]
Decision Date: May 14, 2013