Opinion
570178/04.
Decided January 25, 2006.
Respondent Shirley Wells appeals from (1) a final judgment of the Civil Court, New York County (Cyril K. Bedford, J.), entered on or about March 8, 2004, after a nonjury trial, which awarded petitioner possession of the subject premises in a summary holdover proceeding, and (2) two orders of the same court, dated August 13, 2004 (Laurie L. Lau, J.) and November 15, 2004 (Michelle D. Schreiber, J.), which denied respondent's post-trial motion to set aside the final judgment on the grounds of newly discovered evidence (CPLR 5015[a][2]) and for a new trial.
Final judgment (Cyril K. Bedford, J.) entered on or about March 8, 2004, reversed, without costs, and final judgment directed in favor of respondent Shirley Wells dismissing the petition.
Appeals from orders dated August 13, 2004 (Laurie L. Lau, J.) and November 15, 2004 (Michelle D. Schreiber, J.) dismissed, without costs, as academic.
PRESENT: Suarez, P.J., Davis, Gangel-Jacob, JJ
Despite its express finding that appellant Shirley Wells resided with her mother, the tenant of record, in this Section 8 "project-based" apartment for at least two years prior to the tenant's death in August 2002, the trial court awarded petitioner a possessory judgment on the sole ground that tenant failed to list appellant's name as a household member on an annual recertification form. This was error, for the absence of appellant's name on the family composition document was not fatal to her succession claim otherwise established by the trial evidence (see Matter of Manhattan Plaza Assocs. v. DHPD, 8 AD3d 111).
Upon review of the record, we find no basis to disturb that portion of the trial court's determination duly crediting appellant's testimony that she resided with the tenant for the requisite time period prior to the tenant's death ( see 300 E. 34th St. Co. v. Habeeb, 248 AD2d 50, 55). Under such circumstances, appellant was entitled to continuation of the "project-based" Section 8 subsidy and the dismissal of the licensee holdover proceeding.
This constitutes the decision and order of the court.
I concur