Find Laws Find Lawyers Free Legal Forms USA State Laws
Laws-info.com » Cases » New York » Appellate Term 1st Dept » 2011 » West 15th St. Assoc., L.P. v Fares
West 15th St. Assoc., L.P. v Fares
State: New York
Court: New York Northern District Court
Docket No: 2011 NY Slip Op 51053(U)
Case Date: 06/08/2011
Plaintiff: West 15th St. Assoc., L.P.
Defendant: Fares
Preview:West 15th St. Assoc., L.P. v Fares (2011 NY Slip Op 51053(U))
[*1]


Decided on June 8, 2011
APPELLATE TERM OF THE SUPREME COURT, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Shulman, J.P., Schoenfeld, Torres, JJ 570010/10.
West 15th Street Associates, L.P., Petitioner-Landlord -Appellant,
against
Khadije Fares, Tenant -Respondent, -and - Kassem Fares a/k/a Sammy Fares, "John Doe" and/or "Jane Doe," Respondents -Respondents.
Landlord appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Brenda S. Spears, J.), dated September 10, 2010, which denied its motion for the entry of a default final judgment against tenant, and for summary judgment against respondent Kassem Fares in a holdover summary proceeding.
Per Curiam.
Order (Brenda S. Spears, J.), dated September 10, 2010, affirmed, with $10 costs.
We agree that this holdover summary proceeding against the rent-stabilized tenant and her son is not ripe for summary disposition. The record raises several triable issues as to whether, inter alia, landlord consented or acquiesced to any of the alterations to the subject apartment, including the
file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/NY/1/2011_51053.htm[4/21/2013 12:22:24 PM] West 15th St. Assoc., L.P. v Fares (2011 NY Slip Op 51053(U))
installation of a stove, and whether those alterations constituted "significant violation[s]" of the "no alterations" clause of the parties' lease agreement (Ram I v Stuart, 248 AD2d 255, 256 [1998]; see Garay v Devine, NYLJ, October 27, 1989, at 21, col 1; Solow v Lubliner, NYLJ, June 6, 1990, at 21, col 2).
Given the strong "public policy [which] favors the disposition of matters on their merits" (Bunch v Dollar Budget, Inc., 12 AD3d 391 [2004]), we find no abuse of discretion in the denial of the entry of a default judgment against tenant at this juncture (id.; see Ahmad v Aniolowiski, 28 AD3d 692, 692-693 [2006]).
We have considered landlord's remaining contentions and find them lacking in substantial merit.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
Decision Date: June 08, 2011
file:///C|/Users/Peter/Desktop/NY/1/2011_51053.htm[4/21/2013 12:22:24 PM]

Download 2011_51053.pdf

New York Law

New York State Laws
New York State
    > New York City Zip Code
New York Court
    > New York Courts
New York State Tax
    > New York State Tax Forms
New York Agencies
    > New York DMV

Comments

Tips