P.S. LOFTS LLC & 327 ST NICHOLAS LLC., pet-land-app, v. DENNIS JEROME KYLE, res-ten-res

15-154. P.S. LOFTS LLC & 327 ST NICHOLAS LLC., pet-land-app, v. DENNIS JEROME KYLE, res-ten-res — Ordered that the motion is granted to the extent of granting appellant leave to appeal as a poor person. Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., of the Legal Aid Society, Criminal Appeals Bureau (199 Water Street, 3rd Floor, NY, NY 10038, tel# 212 577-3688) is assigned as counsel for the appellant to prosecute the appeal and to serve without compensation. So Order — Final judgment (Jack Stoller, J.), entered on or about April 25, 2014, affirmed, with $25 costs.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

15-154. P.S. LOFTS LLC & 327 ST NICHOLAS LLC., pet-land-app, v. DENNIS JEROME KYLE, res-ten-res — Ordered that the motion is granted to the extent of granting appellant leave to appeal as a poor person. Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., of the Legal Aid Society, Criminal Appeals Bureau (199 Water Street, 3rd Floor, NY, NY 10038, tel# 212 577-3688) is assigned as counsel for the appellant to prosecute the appeal and to serve without compensation. So Order — Final judgment (Jack Stoller, J.), entered on or about April 25, 2014, affirmed, with $25 costs.

On a nonjury trial, the decision of the fact finding court should not be disturbed on appeal unless the court’s conclusions could not have been reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence (see Thoreson v. Penthouse International, Ltd., 80 NY2d 490, 495 [1992]). Applying that review standard here, we sustain the post-trial dismissal of this holdover proceeding, premised upon allegations that tenant made unauthorized alterations to his rent stabilized apartment. A fair interpretation of the evidence supports the finding that landlord failed to establish that the alleged kitchen alterations performed by tenant constitute a substantial violation. In this regard, the sole witness at trial, landlord’s managing member, Jeffrey Pikus, was admittedly in tenant’s apartment only “briefly”; and Pikus’ terse testimony provided no details concerning the nature and extent of the alleged alterations performed by tenant other than the bald statement “new floor, new cabinets, new appliances.” We agree with the trial court that this testimony was “bare and conclusory…[and] too vague” to prove a substantial violation of the “no alterations” clause in the parties’ lease agreement (see generally Freehold Invs. v. Richstone, 34 NY2d 612 [1974]; Mengoni v. Passey, 254 AD2d 203 [1998]; Britton v. Yazicioglu, 189 AD2d 734 [1993]).

P.S. LOFTS LLC & 327 ST NICHOLAS LLC., pet-land-app, v. DENNIS JEROME KYLE, res-ten-res

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal