New York City Hous. Auth. v O'Connor

Annotate this Case
[*1] New York City Hous. Auth. v O'Connor 2008 NY Slip Op 50081(U) [18 Misc 3d 132(A)] Decided on January 3, 2008 Appellate Term, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on January 3, 2008
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE TERM: 2nd and 11th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : PESCE, P.J., GOLIA and RIOS, JJ
2007-47 RI C.

New York City Housing Authority, (Todt Hill Houses), Respondent,

against

Gerard O'Connor, Appellant, -and- Christine O'Connor, Tenant.

Appeal by tenant Gerard O'Connor from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Richmond County (Marina Mundy, J.), dated November 22, 2006, deemed from a final judgment of said court, entered on the same date (see CPLR 5520 [c]). The final judgment, insofar as appealed from, entered pursuant to the November 22, 2006 order granting landlord's motion for summary judgment, awarded possession to landlord as against Gerard O'Connor in a holdover summary proceeding.


Final judgment affirmed without costs.

The court below correctly ruled that the New York City Housing Authority's administrative determination to terminate appellant's tenancy could not be reviewed in
the instant holdover proceeding, as the "claim that a tenant is ineligible for continued occupancy is determined by the Housing Authority, and its determination is subject to review only in a CPLR Article 78 proceeding" (New York City Hous. Auth. v Velazquez, 191 Misc 2d 15, 16 [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2001]). Appellant's contention that there was a Supreme Court stay in effect when the trial court rendered its decision is not supported by the record. Appellant's remaining contentions are without merit.

Pesce, P.J., Golia and Rios, JJ., concur. [*2]
Decision Date: January 3, 2008

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.