Valette v. N.Y.C. Hous. Auth.
| Decision Date | 31 January 2017 |
| Parties | In re Denise VALETTE, Petitioner–Respondent, v. NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY, Respondent–Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
146 A.D.3d 704
46 N.Y.S.3d 84
2017 N.Y. Slip Op. 00579
In re Denise VALETTE, Petitioner–Respondent,
v.
NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY, Respondent–Appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Jan. 31, 2017.
David I. Farber, New York (Seth E. Kramer of counsel), for appellant.
Denise Valette, respondent pro se.
FRIEDMAN, J.P., SWEENY, RICHTER, MANZANET–DANIELS, KAPNICK, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Andrea Masley, J.), entered July 8, 2015, which vacated respondent's determination, dated February 17, 2015, dismissing petitioner's remaining family member grievance to succeed to the public housing apartment formerly leased to her deceased mother, unanimously reversed, on the law, the petition denied, and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 dismissed, without costs.
"The NYCHA Management Manual requires that a remaining family member grievant must remain current in use and occupancy to pursue the grievance" (Matter of Figueroa v. New York City Hous. Auth., 141 A.D.3d 468, 469, 35 N.Y.S.3d 338 [1st Dept.2016] ). This requirement has been upheld by the Court of Appeals and this Court (see Matter of Henderson v. Popolizio, 76 N.Y.2d 972, 974, 563 N.Y.S.2d 733, 565 N.E.2d 482 [1990] ; Matter of Hawthorne v. New York City Hous. Auth., 81 A.D.3d 420, 420–421, 916 N.Y.S.2d 55 [1st Dept.2011] ; Garcia v. Franco, 248 A.D.2d 263, 264–265, 670 N.Y.S.2d 436 [1st Dept.1998], lv. denied 92 N.Y.2d 813, 680 N.Y.S.2d 906, 703 N.E.2d 764 [1998] ). The facts of this case are distinguishable from Figueroa , 141 A.D.3d 468, 35 N.Y.S.3d 338 as petitioner, who was advised three times in the course of her proceedings, makes no claim that the Housing Authority refused to provide her with requested assistance.
"[N]othing in the Federal regulation requires respondent to grant a formal hearing to every person who makes a bare assertion that he or she is the remaining...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
N.Y.C. Hous. Authority-Fulton Houses v. Alicea
...in use and occupancy, which implicates his eligibility to be deemed a remaining family member. Matter of Valette v. N.Y.C. Hous. Auth. , 146 A.D.3d 704, 705, 46 N.Y.S.3d 84 (1st Dept. 2017). While NYCHA's argument is intuitively persuasive, the merits of a remaining family member grievance ......
-
Powell v. City of N.Y.
...rulings. Although as plaintiff correctly argues, there is no interlocutory appeal as of right from an evidentiary ruling during trial (see46 N.Y.S.3d 84CPLR 5701[a] ; Roman v. City of New York, 187 A.D.2d 390, 390, 590 N.Y.S.2d 714 [1st Dept.1992] ), plaintiff had the opportunity to raise l......
-
Stewart v. Makhani
...to pre-note of issue cases such as this case (see Johnson v. Minskoff & Sons, 287 A.D.2d 233, 235, 735 N.Y.S.2d 503 [1st Dept.2001] ). 146 A.D.3d 704Dismissal of a pre-note of issue case may be predicated on CPLR 3216 and Uniform Rules for Trial Courts (22 NYCRR 202.27 ), neither of which i......
- Braverman v. Braverman