Opinion
2014–1003 K C.
02-23-2016
PACST 1244–46, 1356, LLC, Appellant, v. Niesha SWINTON, Respondent, and “John Doe” and “Jane Doe,” Undertenants.
Opinion
ORDERED that the final judgment is affirmed, without costs.
Landlord commenced this licensee summary proceeding (see RPAPL 713[7] ) to recover possession of a rent-stabilized apartment, alleging that the tenant of record, Anne Cornish (tenant), had passed away in November 2009, and that Niesha Swinton (occupant), tenant's great-niece, had not established succession rights to the premises. After a nonjury trial, the Civil Court found that occupant had established that she was a nontraditional family member pursuant to Rent Stabilization Code § 2520.6(o)(2) and that she was entitled to succession rights. Consequently, the Civil Court entered a final judgment on August 29, 2012 dismissing the petition. We affirm.
Contrary to landlord's contention, the record amply supports the Civil Court's finding that occupant met her affirmative obligation of establishing the requisite emotional and financial commitment and interdependence between her and tenant (see Rent Stabilization Code § 2520.6[o][2] ). Unrebutted testimony, which the court found credible, showed that tenant and occupant had a loving, close, mother/daughter-type relationship. Occupant moved in with tenant when occupant was in junior high school. While occupant was in school, tenant essentially raised occupant, taking care of the necessities of life for occupant, setting rules for occupant to follow and assigning chores for occupant to do. Occupant and tenant shared meals, went shopping together, spent holidays together, and did most daily life activities as a family. Once occupant started working, she began contributing to the household expenses, including the rent. Later, after tenant had had a stroke, occupant cared for tenant, including bathing, dressing and feeding her. Viewed in its totality, this evidence demonstrates that occupant qualifies as a nontraditional family member and is entitled to succession rights (see e.g. RHM Estates v. Hampshire, 18 AD3d 326 [2005] ; Arnie Realty Corp. v. Torres, 294 A.D.2d 193 [2002] ; Hitchcock Plaza, Inc. v. Fortune, 47 Misc.3d 127[A], 2015 N.Y. Slip Op 50373[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2015] ; 25 W. 68th St., LLC v. Whitman, 20 Misc.3d 140[A], 2008 N.Y. Slip Op 51610[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2008] ; AFE Realty Corp. v. Diamond, 7 Misc.3d 136[A], 2005 N.Y. Slip Op 50783[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2005]; Roberts Ave. Assoc. v. Sullivan, 2003 N.Y. Slip Op 51091[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2003] ).
Accordingly, the final judgment is affirmed.
PESCE, P.J., WESTON and SOLOMON, JJ., concur.