BPP ST Owner LLC v Jackson

[*1] BPP ST Owner LLC v Jackson 2020 NY Slip Op 50537(U) Decided on May 8, 2020 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 8, 2020
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Cooper J.P., Edmead, Torres, JJ.
570392/19

BPP ST Owner LLC, Petitioner-Respondent,

against

Naishia Jackson, Respondent-Appellant.

Respondent Naishia Jackson appeals from a final judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County, entered April 26, 2019 (Gary F. Marton, J.), after a nonjury trial, which awarded possession to petitioner in a holdover licensee proceeding.

Per Curiam.

Final judgment (Gary F. Marton, J.), entered April 26, 2019,affirmed, with $25 costs.

The trial court's determination that respondent Jackson, the daughter of the rent stabilized tenant, failed to meet her affirmative obligation to establish succession rights to the subject apartment (see Rent Stabilization Code [9 NYCRR] § 2523.5[b][1]), represents a fair interpretation of the evidence and is not disturbed (see 318 E. 93 v Ward, 276 AD2d 277 [2000]; Claridge Gardens v Menotti, 160 AD2d 544 [1990]). The trial court was warranted in concluding that respondent failed to establish that she primarily resided with her mother at the subject premises for the two years prior to her mother's June 30, 2016 vacatur, given the extensive documentary evidence establishing that respondent lived and worked in California during much of this period and the court's finding that respondent's testimony regarding her use of the apartment was "in the main, not credible."

The court providently exercised its discretion in denying respondent's request to adjourn, made at the commencement of the trial, after her newly retained counsel withdrew (see generally Yuliano v Yuliano, 175 AD3d 1354, 1357 [2019]). Respondent, who had representation for most of this litigation (pending since October 2016), discharged her Legal Aid attorney after the trial date had been set by the Court, and, despite ample time to retain new counsel, did not secure new representation until a few days before trial was to commence.

Nor does the record disclose any evidentiary error warranting reversal.

All concur. THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

Clerk of the Court

Decision Date: May 8, 2020