RCG-UA Glenwood, LLC v. Young

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

RCG-UA Glenwood, LLC v. Young

9 Misc. 3d 25

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJuly 21, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 9 Misc. 3d 25 (RCG-UA Glenwood, LLC v. Young) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

RCG-UA Glenwood, LLC v. Young, 9 Misc. 3d 25 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Final judgment unanimously affirmed without costs.

The record supports the City Court’s determination that tenant, who suffers from schizo-affective disorder, is handicapped within the meaning of the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 (42 USC § 3601 et seq. [FHAA]; see 42 USC § 3602 [h]) and that the clutter conditions in the apartment, now removed, were a result of his disorder. The record also supports the City Court’s determination that, through the treatment program and assistance that St. Joseph’s Medical Center had given tenant (and had committed to continue giving him), tenant’s condition was shown to have greatly improved. While the FHAA does not require a landlord to abide conduct constituting a nuisance, it does, in the circumstances presented, require that tenant be accommodated to the extent of being afforded an opportunity to continue to reside in the apartment pursuant to the aforementioned treatment program (42 USC § 3604 [f]; see Blalock v Amityville Senior Dev. Corp., NYLJ, Nov. 12, 1999, at 36, col 3 [ED NY]; Roe v Housing Auth. of City of Boulder, 909 F Supp 814 [D Colo 1995]; Roe v Sugar River Mills Assoc., 820 F Supp 636 [D NH 1993]). Accordingly, the City Court properly dismissed the petition.

Rudolph, EJ, Angiolillo and Tanenbaum, JJ, concur.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Final judgment unanimously affirmed without costs.

The record supports the City Court’s determination that tenant, who suffers from schizo-affective disorder, is handicapped within the meaning of the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 (42 USC § 3601 et seq. [FHAA]; see 42 USC § 3602 [h]) and that the clutter conditions in the apartment, now removed, were a result of his disorder. The record also supports the City Court’s determination that, through the treatment program and assistance that St. Joseph’s Medical Center had given tenant (and had committed to continue giving him), tenant’s condition was shown to have greatly improved. While the FHAA does not require a landlord to abide conduct constituting a nuisance, it does, in the circumstances presented, require that tenant be accommodated to the extent of being afforded an opportunity to continue to reside in the apartment pursuant to the aforementioned treatment program (42 USC § 3604 [f]; see Blalock v Amityville Senior Dev. Corp., NYLJ, Nov. 12, 1999, at 36, col 3 [ED NY]; Roe v Housing Auth. of City of Boulder, 909 F Supp 814 [D Colo 1995]; Roe v Sugar River Mills Assoc., 820 F Supp 636 [D NH 1993]). Accordingly, the City Court properly dismissed the petition.

Rudolph, EJ, Angiolillo and Tanenbaum, JJ, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

9 Misc. 3d 25, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rcg-ua-glenwood-llc-v-young-nyappterm-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack