GSKP LLC v. Balcon

2024 NY Slip Op 50110(U)
CourtCivil Court Of The City Of New York, New York County
DecidedFebruary 2, 2024
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 2024 NY Slip Op 50110(U) (GSKP LLC v. Balcon) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Civil Court Of The City Of New York, New York County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
GSKP LLC v. Balcon, 2024 NY Slip Op 50110(U) (N.Y. Super. Ct. 2024).

Opinion

GSKP LLC v Balcon (2024 NY Slip Op 50110(U)) [*1]
GSKP LLC v Balcon
2024 NY Slip Op 50110(U)
Decided on February 2, 2024
Civil Court Of The City Of New York, New York County
Ortiz, J.
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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 February 2, 2024
Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County


GSKP LLC, Petitioner, Landlord,

against

Gayle Balcon, Respondent, Tenant, ROBERT D. GORMAN, "JOHN DOE" and/or "JANE DOE" Respondent, Undertenants.




Index No. L&T 53598/16 - NY

Petitioner was represented by Jeffrey Seiden and Evan Nahins, Esq. of Borah Goldstein et. al at 377 Broadway, 7th floor; New York, NY 10013; (212) 431 — 1300, ext. 307; jseiden@borahgoldstein.com and Respondent was represented by Thomas Hillgardner, Esq. 82-63 170th Street, Jamaica, NY 11432, (718) 657 — 0606; tomhillgardner@gmail.com
Frances A. Ortiz, J.

This is a holdover proceeding brought by GSKP LLC, the landlord ("Petitioner") against, Gayle Balcon, the tenant ("Respondent") seeking to recover possession of 28 Bond Street, 2nd floor front a/k/a 2-F, New York, NY 10012 ("the subject premises"). According to the petition, the subject premises is not rent stabilized or rent controlled. However, it is rent regulated pursuant to the Multiple Dwelling Law Article 7C. The petition further indicates that the Petitioner is in compliance with the legalization requirements of the Multiple Dwelling Law Article 7 C and Loft Board regulations.

Pursuant to paragraph thirteen (13) of the petition the subject premises is not being used by the Respondent as her primary residence and Petitioner is entitled to possession of the premises. Additionally, the Notice of Termination dated December 23, 2015 [FN1] indicates Respondent's tenancy is being terminated under Article 7-C of the Multiple Dwelling Law, 29 RCNY2-08 (j) (1) because the subject unit is not the primary residence of the resident occupant; that Respondent has not maintained an ongoing substantial physical nexus to the premises for actual living; that Respondent failed to spend more than 183 days out of the preceding year residing at the premises which is confirmed and substantiated by the Petitioner, since [*2]Respondent is using an address in Floyd, Virginia as a home address including a phone number of (540) 745 — 2386; that Respondent is the owner of a house in Floyd, Virginia; that Respondent's car has Virginia license plates; that Respondent is not registered to vote in New York; and that Respondent does not have a New York State driver's license.

Respondent appeared by counsel who asserted defenses, affirmative defenses and a counterclaim in an amended written answer. (NYSCEF Doc. 160). Specifically, the answer alleges denial of certain paragraphs of the petition, that Respondent is a protected occupant under the Loft Board, that the original Petitioner's [FN2] -"Saada Mehmet Roberts" — mother transferred the building ownership to "28 Bond Street Associates, Inc." in July 10, 2000; that there is no residential certificate of occupancy on file with the Department of Buildings; that upon information and belief, the Petitioner is not in compliance with Article 7-B standards of the Multiple Dwelling Law; that as a result Petitioner is not entitled to the collection of use and occupancy; and a counterclaim for attorney's fees based upon a three year lease provided to Respondent in April 1978. (Petitioner's 3 in evidence).

A trial on the matter was conducted on January 20 and 23, 2023, February 2 and 7, 2023, March 3, 16 and 17, 2023, May 12, 2023, July 7, 2023 and August 4, 2023. The following witnesses testified on behalf of the Petitioner: Saada Roberts and Gayle Balcon. The following witnesses testified on behalf of the Respondent: Gayle Balcon and Stephen Weber. Petitioner entered into evidence thirty-five (35) exhibits and Respondent entered into evidence fourteen (14) exhibits.

TESTIMONY

Saada Roberts testified that that she is the managing member of the Petitioner's LLC since 2019; that she manages the subject building by repairing and cleaning it; that she visits the subject building regularly; that in the time period of 2014 and 2015 she visited the building three times a week to maintain the garbage disposal of the building; that she needs to obtain a certificate of occupancy for the building; that she hired an architect to help get the legalization process and narrative statement needed for the Loft Board to obtain the subject building's interim multiple dwelling status; that as a result she visited the building at least four times a week and even twice a day; that she lived at 26 Bond St. which is the building next door, up to 2012; that she knows the Respondent since 1990; that Respondent was not living at the subject premises prior to 2014; that prior to 2010 Respondent had a pattern of not being at the building; that in 2010 there was a change in pattern from Respondent; that Respondent would drive her blue bus Volkswagen and go away weeks at a time; that around 2010 she saw that Respondent and her husband would leave from Christmas till June starting in 2010; that they would not come back until September; that after 2010 there was a time when Respondent asked her to sublet in September of 2010; that she objected to the sublet but that her objection was too late so she had no choice but to allow the sublet; that someone by the name of James Knight lived at the subject premises from January 13, 2011 till January 13, 2013; that in 2013 Respondent came back in April 2013; that she mailed keys for the subject premises to Respondent in Virginia; that Respondent arrived in May or June of 2013 with spotty occupancy; that Respondent returned in mid-July and sometime between July and September 2013 but it was spotty; that then [*3]Respondent returned sometime in mid-October to November 2013, that in 2014 she saw Respondent walking her dog and heard her birds chirping; that she knew when Respondent was not present at the subject premises because it would be silent (e.g. no dog or bird noises); that in 2014 Respondent came in May and June 2014 with very spotty stays -not the whole time - or for one week and nothing more-; that she came back in September 2014 and then left in October 2014; that before the end of that month she tried to get inside the apartment to do some repairs and Respondent was not in New York; that Respondent may have come back late in November of 2014; that at the time the utility was turned off; that she had a conversation with Respondent and her husband in July 2014 about an inspection that was needed; that they spoke to her about the home in Virginia; that Respondent told her that the home in Virginia was her husband's-Bob's- home; that he inherited it; that there was a rotation of people coming into the building who got Respondent's mail from 6:00 to 7:00 p.m.

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

Related

GSKP LLC v. Balcon
2024 NY Slip Op 50110(U) (NYC Civil Court, New York, 2024)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2024 NY Slip Op 50110(U), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gskp-llc-v-balcon-nycivctny-2024.