IN RE 322 WEST 47TH STREET HDFC, pet-res, v. MARGIE LOO, res-ap, “JOHN DOE,” res

4364. IN RE 322 WEST 47TH STREET HDFC, pet-res, v. MARGIE LOO, res-ap, "JOHN DOE," res — The Law Offices of Edward Alper, New York (Edward Alper of counsel), for ap — Travis Law Firm PLLC, New York (Christopher R. Travis of counsel), for res — Order of the Appellate Term of the Supreme Court, First Department, entered on or about February 25, 2016, which affirmed a final judgment of the Civil Court, New York County (Arlene H. Hahn, J.), entered on or about July 30, 2015, which, after a nonjury trial, awarded possession of respondent tenant's apartment to petitioner landlord in this summary holdover proceeding, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

4364. IN RE 322 WEST 47TH STREET HDFC, pet-res, v. MARGIE LOO, res-ap, “JOHN DOE,” res — The Law Offices of Edward Alper, New York (Edward Alper of counsel), for ap — Travis Law Firm PLLC, New York (Christopher R. Travis of counsel), for res — Order of the Appellate Term of the Supreme Court, First Department, entered on or about February 25, 2016, which affirmed a final judgment of the Civil Court, New York County (Arlene H. Hahn, J.), entered on or about July 30, 2015, which, after a nonjury trial, awarded possession of respondent tenant’s apartment to petitioner landlord in this summary holdover proceeding, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We decline to reach in the interest of justice tenant’s unpreserved argument, raised for the first time in reply papers, that she was not served with a pretermination notice that is required where, as here, the catch-all “good cause” ground is cited by the landlord as the basis to terminate her tenancy (see generally 24 CFR 247.3). Were we to entertain the argument, we would find it unavailing as the purpose of such notice is to provide tenant with advance notice of his or her alleged conduct that would be grounds for termination pursuant to 24 CFR 247.3(a)(4). Here, tenant admitted that she had been fully aware that her nonpurchase of apartment 5R’s shares upon the building’s conversion to a subsidized low income cooperative housing project, pursuant to an eviction offering plan, could subject her to eviction. Moreover, tenant’s failure to raise the notice issue constituted a waiver of such claim and does not implicate the court’s subject matter jurisdiction (see generally 433 W. Assoc. v. Murdock, 276 AD2d 360 [1st Dept 2000]).

IN RE 322 WEST 47TH STREET HDFC, pet-res, v. MARGIE LOO, res-ap, “JOHN DOE,” res

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal