Wright v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wright v. New York City Housing Authority

294 A.D.2d 181, 742 N.Y.S.2d 816, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4996

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

DecidedMay 14, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 294 A.D.2d 181 (Wright 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

Wright v. New York City Housing Authority, 294 A.D.2d 181, 742 N.Y.S.2d 816, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4996 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Determination of respondent New York City Housing Authority, dated June 21, 2000, terminating the subject tenancy, 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 [Ronald Zweibel, J.], entered March 12, 2001), dismissed, without costs.

The determination is supported by substantial evidence that petitioner Morinia vacated the subject apartment in late 1997 and allowed her granddaughter, petitioner Wright, to take up residence without first requesting respondent’s authorization. No basis exists to disturb respondent’s findings of credibility, including those relating to Morinia’s intent to return to the apartment (see, Matter of Berenhaus v Ward, 70 NY2d 436, 443-444). The penalty of lease termination does not shock our sense of fairness (see, Matter of Wooten v Finkle, 285 AD2d 407, 408-409). Concur—Andrias, J.P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Rubin and Friedman, 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 June 21, 2000, terminating the subject tenancy, 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 [Ronald Zweibel, J.], entered March 12, 2001), dismissed, without costs.

The determination is supported by substantial evidence that petitioner Morinia vacated the subject apartment in late 1997 and allowed her granddaughter, petitioner Wright, to take up residence without first requesting respondent’s authorization. No basis exists to disturb respondent’s findings of credibility, including those relating to Morinia’s intent to return to the apartment (see, Matter of Berenhaus v Ward, 70 NY2d 436, 443-444). The penalty of lease termination does not shock our sense of fairness (see, Matter of Wooten v Finkle, 285 AD2d 407, 408-409). Concur—Andrias, J.P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Rubin and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

294 A.D.2d 181, 742 N.Y.S.2d 816, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4996, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wright-v-new-york-city-housing-authority-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack