New York City Housing Authority v. Murphy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

New York City Housing Authority v. Murphy

274 A.D.2d 397, 711 N.Y.S.2d 761, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7544

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 3, 2000·Published

Opinion

—In a summary holdover proceeding to recover possession of an apartment, the tenant appeals, by permission and as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Appellate Term of the Supreme Court for the Second and Eleventh Judicial Districts, dated February 11, 1999, as affirmed an order of the Civil Court, Kings County (Hoahng, J.), dated February 3, 1997, which, upon granting her motion, in effect, for reargument, adhered to the determination in a prior order of the same court dated December 23, 1996, denying her motion, inter alia, to vacate a stipulation of settlement.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Without reaching the issue of whether RPAPL 753 (4) applies to the instant proceeding, we find, that upon the record before us, the appellant failed to establish any ground for vacating the stipulation (see, Gaton v Gaton, 170 AD2d 576, 577; Golfinopoulos v Golfinopoulos, 144 AD2d 537, 538). Gold-stein, J. P., McGinity, Luciano and Smith, JJ., concur.

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

—In a summary holdover proceeding to recover possession of an apartment, the tenant appeals, by permission and as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Appellate Term of the Supreme Court for the Second and Eleventh Judicial Districts, dated February 11, 1999, as affirmed an order of the Civil Court, Kings County (Hoahng, J.), dated February 3, 1997, which, upon granting her motion, in effect, for reargument, adhered to the determination in a prior order of the same court dated December 23, 1996, denying her motion, inter alia, to vacate a stipulation of settlement.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Without reaching the issue of whether RPAPL 753 (4) applies to the instant proceeding, we find, that upon the record before us, the appellant failed to establish any ground for vacating the stipulation (see, Gaton v Gaton, 170 AD2d 576, 577; Golfinopoulos v Golfinopoulos, 144 AD2d 537, 538). Gold-stein, J. P., McGinity, Luciano and Smith, JJ., concur.

New York City Housing Authority v. Murphy, 274 A.D.2d 397, 711 N.Y.S.2d 761, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7544 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

274 A.D.2d 397 (New York City Housing Authority v. Murphy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related