Pickering-George v. Wambua

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Pickering-George v. Wambua

117 A.D.3d 583, 986 N.Y.S.2d 104

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

DecidedMay 20, 2014

StatusPublished

This text of 117 A.D.3d 583 (Pickering-George v. Wambua) 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

Pickering-George v. Wambua, 117 A.D.3d 583, 986 N.Y.S.2d 104 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Determination of respondent Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD), dated August 22, 2012, which, after a hearing, terminated petitioner’s Section 8 rent subsidy, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied, and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of Supreme Court, New York County [Eileen A. Rakower, J.], entered April 9, 2013), dismissed, without costs.

The determination is supported by substantial evidence, including petitioner’s own testimony (see generally 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 180-181 [1978]). Such evidence shows that petitioner failed to pay his portion of the rent for the subject apartment for an extended period of time (see 24 CFR 982.552); that he vacated the premises without notifying or obtaining the approval of HPD; and that he was absent from the premises for more than 180 days (see 24 CFR 982.312).

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

Concur—Mazzarelli, J.E, Acosta, Andrias, Saxe and Clark, JJ.

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

Determination of respondent Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD), dated August 22, 2012, which, after a hearing, terminated petitioner’s Section 8 rent subsidy, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied, and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of Supreme Court, New York County [Eileen A. Rakower, J.], entered April 9, 2013), dismissed, without costs.

The determination is supported by substantial evidence, including petitioner’s own testimony (see generally 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 180-181 [1978]). Such evidence shows that petitioner failed to pay his portion of the rent for the subject apartment for an extended period of time (see 24 CFR 982.552); that he vacated the premises without notifying or obtaining the approval of HPD; and that he was absent from the premises for more than 180 days (see 24 CFR 982.312).

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

Concur—Mazzarelli, J.E, Acosta, Andrias, Saxe and Clark, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

117 A.D.3d 583, 986 N.Y.S.2d 104, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pickering-george-v-wambua-nyappdiv-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack