Opinion
14185 Index No. 101764/18 Case No. 2019–03934
07-08-2021
In the Matter of Hassan RABI, Petitioner–Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT, Respondent–Respondent.
Hassan Rabi, appellant pro se. James E. Johnson, Corporation Counsel, New York (Eric Lee of counsel), for respondent.
Hassan Rabi, appellant pro se.
James E. Johnson, Corporation Counsel, New York (Eric Lee of counsel), for respondent.
Manzanet–Daniels, J.P., Webber, Singh, Kennedy, JJ.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Arlene P. Bluth, J.), entered August 12, 2019, denying the petition to annul a determination of respondent (HPD), dated August 6, 2018, which terminated petitioner's section 8 rent subsidy ( 42 USC § 1437 et seq. ), and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Petitioner failed to exhaust his administrative remedies by not timely requesting an informal hearing to challenge the termination of his Section 8 benefits (see CPLR 7801[1] ; Watergate II Apts. v. Buffalo Sewer Auth., 46 N.Y.2d 52, 57, 412 N.Y.S.2d 821, 385 N.E.2d 560 [1978] ; Matter of Gill v. Mercy Coll., 138 A.D.3d 423, 423, 27 N.Y.S.3d 863 [1st Dept. 2016], lv dismissed 28 N.Y.3d 1154, 49 N.Y.S.3d 84, 71 N.E.3d 575 [2017] ; Matter of Pascale v. New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 157 A.D.3d 625, 67 N.Y.S.3d 463 [1st Dept. 2018] ).
In any event, HPD's termination of the subsidy, based upon petitioner's failure to submit a recertification package for 2018, was not arbitrary and capricious ( CPLR 7803[d] ). Both the applicable federal regulations and HPD's Administrative Plan authorize the termination of a Section 8 participant's subsidy for failure to provide requested information ( 24 CFR 982.551 [b][2]; 982.552; Administration Plan §§ 7.1.2; 15.4.2; see Matter of Peckham v. Calogero, 12 N.Y.3d 424, 431, 883 N.Y.S.2d 751, 911 N.E.2d 813 [2009] ; Matter of Dowling v. Holland, 245 A.D.2d 167, 169, 666 N.Y.S.2d 585 [1st Dept. 1997] ). HPD's denial of petitioner's request for an informal hearing was also rational, given petitioner's failure to make the request "within 30 calendar days from the date printed on the [termination] notice" (Administrative Plan § 16.3.4).