Rentas v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rentas v. New York City Housing Authority

282 A.D.2d 215, 722 N.Y.S.2d 241, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3405

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

DecidedApril 3, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 282 A.D.2d 215 (Rentas 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

Rentas v. New York City Housing Authority, 282 A.D.2d 215, 722 N.Y.S.2d 241, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3405 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Determination of respondent New York City Housing Authority, dated July 13, 1998, which denied petitioner’s grievance of respondent’s decision that petitioner does not qualify as a remaining family member entitled to succeed to the subject public housing apartment previously leased to her half-sister, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied, and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Barbara Kapnick, J.], entered April 13, 1999), dismissed, without costs.

Upon review of the record, we find that there was substantial evidence (see, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 180) to support respondent’s determination that petitioner was not entitled to succeed to the lease as a remaining family member. Petitioner never obtained written approval from the project management to become a permanent member of the then authorized tenant family (see, NY City Hous Auth Mgt Manual ch VII [E] [1] [a], [d]; Matter of Powell v Franco, 276 AD2d 430, 430-431; Matter of Davis v Franco, 270 AD2d 55, 56). We have considered petitioner’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur— Nardelli, J. P., Tom, Andrias, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.

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

—Determination of respondent New York City Housing Authority, dated July 13, 1998, which denied petitioner’s grievance of respondent’s decision that petitioner does not qualify as a remaining family member entitled to succeed to the subject public housing apartment previously leased to her half-sister, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied, and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Barbara Kapnick, J.], entered April 13, 1999), dismissed, without costs.

Upon review of the record, we find that there was substantial evidence (see, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176, 180) to support respondent’s determination that petitioner was not entitled to succeed to the lease as a remaining family member. Petitioner never obtained written approval from the project management to become a permanent member of the then authorized tenant family (see, NY City Hous Auth Mgt Manual ch VII [E] [1] [a], [d]; Matter of Powell v Franco, 276 AD2d 430, 430-431; Matter of Davis v Franco, 270 AD2d 55, 56). We have considered petitioner’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur— Nardelli, J. P., Tom, Andrias, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

282 A.D.2d 215, 722 N.Y.S.2d 241, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3405, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rentas-v-new-york-city-housing-authority-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack