Rosario-Gil v. 605 W. 42nd Owner LLC
This text of Rosario-Gil v. 605 W. 42nd Owner LLC (Rosario-Gil v. 605 W. 42nd Owner LLC) 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.
Opinion
It appears you are using Adblock. Please disable Adblock to best experience our website.
Bureau Thomas J.K. Smith, State Reporter
Court Decisions Resources About
Rosario-Gil v 605 W. 42nd Owner LLC
2026 NY Slip Op 50722(U)
May 14, 2026
Appellate Term, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.
Aida Rosario-Gil, Petitioner-Tenant-Appellant,
v
605 West 42nd Owner LLC, Respondent-Landlord-Respondent, and The Department of Housing Preservation and Development (DHPD), Respondent.
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Decided on May 14, 2026
570384/26
Present: James, P.J., Brigantti, Perez, JJ.
Petitioner-tenant appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Alberto M. Gonzalez, J.), dated July 29, 2025, which denied her motion for sanctions and granted respondent-landlord's cross- motion to dismiss the petition in a Housing Part enforcement proceeding.
[*1]Per Curiam.
Order (Alberto M. Gonzalez, J.), dated July 29, 2025, affirmed, without costs.
Civil Court properly granted respondent-landlord's motion to dismiss this Housing Part enforcement proceeding. The record, as well as the Department of Housing Preservation and Development's (HPD) website records, of which the court took judicial notice (see Multiple Dwelling Law (MDL) § 328 [3]; Hoya Saxa v Gowan, 149 Misc 2d 191 [App Term, 1st Dept 1991]), established that the two violations in petitioner's apartment that were listed in the parties' April 3, 2025 consent order were corrected by landlord (see Frankel v 71st St. Lexington Corp., 46 Misc 3d 149[A], 2015 NY Slip Op 50264[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2015]; Malize v New York City Hous. Auth., 37 Misc 3d 138[A], 2012 NY Slip Op 52196[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2012]). Nor is there any basis on this record for imposing sanctions against landlord.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: May 14, 2026
Links to or from other sites do not signify endorsement or relationship with them.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI