Opinion
March 1, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County [Herman Cahn, J.].
Substantial evidence supports respondent's finding that, though the tenant used some portion of his apartment as a photography studio, his use was predominantly residential, and that finding may not be disturbed by this Court (see, Confederated Props. v Nosek, 2 A.D.2d 383, 384).
We have considered petitioner's remaining arguments, and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Carro, Wallach and Tom, JJ.