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

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 24, 2009·Published·Cited by 2 cases

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

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

Pincite

67 A.D.3d 604 (Lakins v. New York City Housing Authority) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related