2232-2240 ACP Owner LLC v. Teardrops of Elegance, Inc.
This text of 76 Misc. 3d 138(A) (2232-2240 ACP Owner LLC v. Teardrops of Elegance, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
2232-2240 ACP Owner LLC v Teardrops of Elegance, Inc. (2022 NY Slip Op 51019(U)) [*1]
| 2232-2240 ACP Owner LLC v Teardrops of Elegance, Inc. |
| 2022 NY Slip Op 51019(U) [76 Misc 3d 138(A)] |
| Decided on October 19, 2022 |
| 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| This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 October 19, 2022
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Hagler, J.P., Tisch, Michael, JJ.
570260/22
against
Teardrops of Elegance, Inc., Gilda S. Cruz, Respondents-Appellants.
Respondent Gilda S. Cruz appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Jose A. Padilla, Jr., J.), entered March 1, 2022, which denied her posteviction motion to be restored to possession in a commercial nonpayment summary proceeding.
Per Curiam.
Order (Jose A. Padilla, Jr., J.), entered March 1, 2022, affirmed, without costs.
We find no abuse of discretion in the denial of respondent's application for posteviction relief in this commercial nonpayment proceeding (see 52 Hamilton Place NYC Corp. v Araman, 57 Misc 3d 152(A), 2017 NY Slip Op 51584(U) [App Term, 1st Dept 2017]). Restoration relief is unavailable because four years have elapsed since the eviction and a new tenant is in possession, who has not been made a party to this proceeding (see Eight Assoc. v Hynes, 102 AD2d 746, 748 [1984], affd 65 NY2d 739 [1985]). In any event, respondent failed to establish good cause for the relief sought, since she failed to comply with the terms of four stipulations of settlement, and has neither alleged nor shown that she has paid any portion of the substantial rental arrears that have accrued (see RPAPL 749(3); see also Matter of 1621 St. Nicholas Ave Owners LLC v Cruz, 146 AD3d 409, 410 [2017]).
All concur
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
Clerk of the Court
Decision Date: October 19, 2022
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
76 Misc. 3d 138(A), 2022 NY Slip Op 51019(U), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/2232-2240-acp-owner-llc-v-teardrops-of-elegance-inc-nyappterm-2022.