Opinion
05-11-2017
In re Marisol RODRIGUEZ, Petitioner, v. Shola OLATOYE, etc., Respondent.
William E. Leavitt, New York, for petitioner. David I. Farber, New York (Seth E. Kramer of counsel), for respondent.
William E. Leavitt, New York, for petitioner.
David I. Farber, New York (Seth E. Kramer of counsel), for respondent.
Determination of respondent New York City Housing Authority, dated September 2, 2015, which, after a hearing, denied petitioner's grievance seeking succession rights to the tenancy of her late grandmother, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied, and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of Supreme Court, New York County [Barbara Jaffe, J.], entered May 26, 2016), dismissed, without costs.
Substantial evidence, including a lease and investigative evidence reflecting petitioner's residency elsewhere, supports respondent's determination that petitioner is not entitled to succession rights as a remaining family member (see generally 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v. State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176, 180–182, 408 N.Y.S.2d 54, 379 N.E.2d 1183 [1978] ). Petitioner failed to meet her burden of establishing continuous occupancy in the subject apartment for one year prior to her grandmother's death (see Matter of
Jenkins v. New York City Hous. Auth., Amsterdam Houses, 129 A.D.3d 432, 11 N.Y.S.3d 40 [1st Dept.2015] ; Matter of Jacobowitz v. New York City Hous. Auth., 49 A.D.3d 278, 854 N.Y.S.2d 341 [1st Dept.2008] ). There exists no basis to disturb the credibility determinations of the Hearing Officer (see Matter of Berenhaus v. Ward, 70 N.Y.2d 436, 443, 522 N.Y.S.2d 478, 517 N.E.2d 193 [1987] ).
We have considered petitioner's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.
FRIEDMAN, J.P., MOSKOWITZ, MANZANET–DANIELS, KAPNICK, WEBBER, JJ., concur.