420 East Associates v. Estate of Lennon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

420 East Associates v. Estate of Lennon

223 A.D.2d 408, 636 N.Y.S.2d 56, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 271

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 16, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 223 A.D.2d 408 (420 East Associates v. Estate of Lennon) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

420 East Associates v. Estate of Lennon, 223 A.D.2d 408, 636 N.Y.S.2d 56, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 271 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Lowe, III, J.), entered January 25, 1995, which, inter alia, granted plaintiff landlord’s motion for summary judgment to the extent of awarding it possession of the subject apartment and denied defendant Soble’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Defendant Soble, the occupant of the subject apartment, failed to present any evidence demonstrating a material issue of fact as to her right of succession to the subject apartment. Had the subject apartment been her primary residence for no less than two years prior to the permanent vacating of the apartment by the original tenant of record, supporting evidence, such as affidavits of third parties, correspondence addressed to her at the apartment, and/or commercial receipts, would be readily available to defendant-appellant (see, Matter of Rose Assocs. v State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 121 AD2d 185). However, the record is completely devoid of such proof. The landlord, on the other hand, submitted overwhelming documentary proof that defendant’s primary residence during the period in question was in Maryland.

Defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Ross and Williams, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Lowe, III, J.), entered January 25, 1995, which, inter alia, granted plaintiff landlord’s motion for summary judgment to the extent of awarding it possession of the subject apartment and denied defendant Soble’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Defendant Soble, the occupant of the subject apartment, failed to present any evidence demonstrating a material issue of fact as to her right of succession to the subject apartment. Had the subject apartment been her primary residence for no less than two years prior to the permanent vacating of the apartment by the original tenant of record, supporting evidence, such as affidavits of third parties, correspondence addressed to her at the apartment, and/or commercial receipts, would be readily available to defendant-appellant (see, Matter of Rose Assocs. v State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 121 AD2d 185). However, the record is completely devoid of such proof. The landlord, on the other hand, submitted overwhelming documentary proof that defendant’s primary residence during the period in question was in Maryland.

Defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Ross and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

223 A.D.2d 408, 636 N.Y.S.2d 56, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 271, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/420-east-associates-v-estate-of-lennon-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack