Lipschitz v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lipschitz v. New York City Housing Authority

258 A.D.2d 622, 682 N.Y.S.2d 902

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

DecidedJanuary 19, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 258 A.D.2d 622 (Lipschitz 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

Lipschitz v. New York City Housing Authority, 258 A.D.2d 622, 682 N.Y.S.2d 902 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York City Housing Authority which, after a hearing, denied the petitioner’s grievance seeking to establish her status and her two sons’ status as remaining family members of the tenancy of her late father’s apartment, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dowd, J.), dated October 8, 1997, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the appellant’s contentions, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition challenging the determination of the New York City Housing Authority that she and her two [623]*623sons were not entitled to remaining family members status of the tenancy of her late father’s apartment. The determination of the Housing Authority was neither arbitrary nor capricious (see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222). Santucci, J. P., Altman, Friedmann and McGinity, JJ., concur.

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

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York City Housing Authority which, after a hearing, denied the petitioner’s grievance seeking to establish her status and her two sons’ status as remaining family members of the tenancy of her late father’s apartment, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dowd, J.), dated October 8, 1997, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the appellant’s contentions, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition challenging the determination of the New York City Housing Authority that she and her two [623]*623sons were not entitled to remaining family members status of the tenancy of her late father’s apartment. The determination of the Housing Authority was neither arbitrary nor capricious (see, Matter of Pell v Board of Educ., 34 NY2d 222). Santucci, J. P., Altman, Friedmann and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

258 A.D.2d 622, 682 N.Y.S.2d 902, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lipschitz-v-new-york-city-housing-authority-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack