Matter of Medina v. New York City Hous. Auth.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Medina v. New York City Hous. Auth.

139 A.D.3d 441, 29 N.Y.S.3d 179

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

DecidedMay 5, 2016

Docket1066 400732/14

StatusPublished

This text of 139 A.D.3d 441 (Matter of Medina v. New York City Hous. Auth.) 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

Matter of Medina v. New York City Hous. Auth., 139 A.D.3d 441, 29 N.Y.S.3d 179 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol E. Huff, J.), entered December 17, 2014, denying the petition to annul respondent New York City Housing Authority’s (NYCHA) determination dated February 4, 2014, which denied, after a *442 hearing, petitioner’s remaining family member grievance, and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Respondent’s determination has a rational basis in the record, and was not arbitrary and capricious. Petitioner admitted that she did not receive NYCHA’s written consent to rejoin the apartment leased by her mother and had lived there for less than one year prior to her mother’s death (see Matter of Adler v New York City Hous. Auth., 95 AD3d 694, 695 [1st Dept 2012], lv dismissed 20 NY3d 1053 [2013]). Petitioner’s mitigating circumstances do not provide a basis for annulling NYCHA’s determination (see Matter of Firpi v New York City Hous. Auth., 107 AD3d 523, 524 [1st Dept 2013]).

We have considered petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing.

Concur — Sweeny, J.P., Acosta, ManzanetDaniels, Gische and Gesmer, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol E. Huff, J.), entered December 17, 2014, denying the petition to annul respondent New York City Housing Authority’s (NYCHA) determination dated February 4, 2014, which denied, after a *442 hearing, petitioner’s remaining family member grievance, and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Respondent’s determination has a rational basis in the record, and was not arbitrary and capricious. Petitioner admitted that she did not receive NYCHA’s written consent to rejoin the apartment leased by her mother and had lived there for less than one year prior to her mother’s death (see Matter of Adler v New York City Hous. Auth., 95 AD3d 694, 695 [1st Dept 2012], lv dismissed 20 NY3d 1053 [2013]). Petitioner’s mitigating circumstances do not provide a basis for annulling NYCHA’s determination (see Matter of Firpi v New York City Hous. Auth., 107 AD3d 523, 524 [1st Dept 2013]).

We have considered petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing.

Concur — Sweeny, J.P., Acosta, ManzanetDaniels, Gische and Gesmer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

139 A.D.3d 441, 29 N.Y.S.3d 179, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-medina-v-new-york-city-hous-auth-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack