By: Shulman, P.J., Gonzalez, J.18-264. COOL NYC APTS. LLC, pet-lan-res, v. NELLIE WITTER, res-ten,-and-LISA KNIGHT, res-und-app, -and- “JOHN DOE” -and- “JANE DOE,” res-und — Final judgment (Cheryl J. Gonzales, J.), entered January 10, 2018, affirmed, with $25 costs.We agree with the trial court that landlord met its burden of establishing that the subject apartment was being used by appellant Knight, the now-deceased tenant’s adult granddaughter, for illegal drug activities. The trial evidence established that the police obtained a warrant to search the subject apartment and recovered 37 ziplock bags containing marijuana, a digital scale, numerous empty zip-lock bags and $7,230 in cash. The arresting officer, based upon his extensive experience, characterized the marijuana as “packaged for sale” in “dime bags.” In addition, tenant’s granddaughter was arrested as a result of the search and subsequently pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor drug charge. These demonstrated facts warranted the conclusion that the subject apartment was being used for illegal purposes (see Matter of 88-09 Realty v Hill, 305 AD2d 409 [2003]). We also have no basis to disturb the court’s credibility determinations, including its rejection of appellant’s testimony that the drugs were solely for personal use as “self-serving” and “not credible,”.We need not consider whether tenant knew or should have known of her granddaughter’s illegal drug activity in the apartment and acquiesced in any such activity (see 855-79 LLC v Salas, 40 AD3d 553, 555 [2007]), since the parties stipulated prior to trial that any possessory judgment recovered would not be enforced against the then-centenarian tenant, who neither answered nor appeared at trial.Even assuming appellant had standing to raise the issue of landlord’s noncompliance with the notice requirements of New York City Rent & Eviction Regulations (9 NYCRR) §2204.3 (but see 170 W 85th St. Tenants Assn. v Cruz, 173 AD2d 338 [1991]; 539 W 156, L.L.C. v Hernandez, 55 Misc 3d 144[A], 2017 NY Slip Op 50663[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2017]; 1700 First Ave. LLC v Parsons — Novak, 46 Misc 3d 30 [App Term, 1st Dept 2014]; West End Assoc. v McGlone, 32 Misc 3d 145[A], 2011 NY Slip Op 51732[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2011]), the defense was waived, since appellant failed to assert it in her answer or at any time during the trial proceedings (see Matter of 322 W. 47th St. HDFC v Loo, 153 AD3d 1143 [2017], lv dismissed 30 NY3d 1084 [2018]; 433 W. Assoc. v Murdock, 276 AD2d 360 [2000]; Goldman v Flynn, 57 Misc 3d 140[A], 2017 NY Slip Op 51345[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2017]).We have considered appellant’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing.THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.October 24, 2018
