Lakins v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lakins v. New York City Housing Authority

67 A.D.3d 604, 888 N.Y.S.2d 407

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

DecidedNovember 24, 2009

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 67 A.D.3d 604 (Lakins v. New York City Housing Authority) 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

Lakins v. New York City Housing Authority, 67 A.D.3d 604, 888 N.Y.S.2d 407 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter B. Tolub, J.), entered December 15, 2008, which denied the petition and dismissed this proceeding brought pursuant to ,CPLR article 78 seeking to review respondent’s determination to terminate the tenancy of petitioner Wesley Lakins, unanimously dismissed, without costs.

Although petitioner-appellant Diana Lakins was the wife of the tenant of record Wesley Lakins and was an occupant of the subject apartment, she does not have standing to pursue this appeal since she was not a colessee of the apartment. Indeed, respondent was not even required to serve Diana with a notice and specification of charges (see McLaughlin v Hernandez, 16 AD3d 344, 345 [2005] [respondent “is not obligated to serve . . . notice on household members other than the tenant of record”]).

[605]*605We have considered appellant’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur—Friedman, J.P., McGuire, Renwick, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

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

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter B. Tolub, J.), entered December 15, 2008, which denied the petition and dismissed this proceeding brought pursuant to ,CPLR article 78 seeking to review respondent’s determination to terminate the tenancy of petitioner Wesley Lakins, unanimously dismissed, without costs.

Although petitioner-appellant Diana Lakins was the wife of the tenant of record Wesley Lakins and was an occupant of the subject apartment, she does not have standing to pursue this appeal since she was not a colessee of the apartment. Indeed, respondent was not even required to serve Diana with a notice and specification of charges (see McLaughlin v Hernandez, 16 AD3d 344, 345 [2005] [respondent “is not obligated to serve . . . notice on household members other than the tenant of record”]).

[605]*605We have considered appellant’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur—Friedman, J.P., McGuire, Renwick, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

67 A.D.3d 604, 888 N.Y.S.2d 407, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lakins-v-new-york-city-housing-authority-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack