The following papers, numbered 1 to _, were read on this motion to/for X-motionNotice of Motion/Order to Show Cause — Affidavits — Exhibits No(s) 1Answering Affidavits — Exhibits No(s) 2-3Replying Affidavits No(s) 4
*1 Upon the foregoing papers, it is ordered that this motion isIn this action for succession rights to a rent stabilized apartment, plaintiff Lilia Cisneros moves for a preliminary injunction to enjoin the defendants from commencing a housing court proceeding against her. In support of her motion, plaintiff has submitted evidence in the form of affidavits, W-2s, bank statements, paychecks and other documentary proof to demonstrate that she has resided in the subject apartment since at least two years prior her mother’s death on November 1, 2016, as required under 9 N.Y.C.R.R. §2204.6(d) and has thus established a likelihood of success on the merits (Terrell v. Terrell, 279 A.D.2d 301, 303 [1st Dep't 2001] [finding that preliminary injunction was warranted to prevent eviction where plaintiff sufficiently established that decedent's son lacked mental capacity]). Defendants challenge this evidence by pointing out some alleged inconsistencies and submitting an affidavit from the landlord stating that he “do[es] not believe that either the plaintiff or Maria Cisneros [plaintiff's mother] were residing in the subject apartment together over the past two years…” (Affidavit of Rasim Toskic dated November 28, 2017, 6). However, the landlord’s belief is not based on personal knowledge and is insufficient to rebut plaintiff’s showing (Ma v. Lien, 198 A.D.2d 186 [1st Dep't 1993]; Ying Fung Moy v. Hohi Umeki, 10 A.D.3d 604 [2d Dep't 2004] [stating that all that must be shown to prevail on a request for a preliminary injunction is the likelihood of success on the merits and conclusive proof is not required]).
