From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brandeis v. Joy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 1, 1985
112 A.D.2d 126 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Opinion

July 1, 1985

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bernstein, J.).


Judgment reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, determination confirmed and proceeding dismissed on the merits.

The issue of petitioners' good faith was a question of fact to be determined by the commissioner ( see, Matter of Mucskova v Commissioner of Dept. of Hous. Preservation Dev., 105 A.D.2d 787; Matter of Asco Equities v. McGoldrick, 285 App. Div. 381, affd 309 N.Y. 738). Upon review of the record, we find that the commissioner's determination is supported by substantial evidence and thus, has a rational basis. Accordingly, Special Term should not have substituted its judgment and disturbed that determination ( see, Matter of Colton v. Berman, 21 N.Y.2d 322; Matter of Acevedo v. Weaver, 6 A.D.2d 835).

Moreover, the undisputed evidence in the record indicates that the Rendas are both over the age of 62 years and have resided in the subject apartment since 1946.

As stated by the Court of Appeals in Matter of Guerriera v Joy ( 64 N.Y.2d 747, 748): "Under recent amendments to the Administrative Code of the City of New York (§ Y51-6.0, subd b, par 1), the Emergency Housing Rent Control Law (L 1946, ch 274, § 5, subd 2, par [a], as amd by L 1961, ch 337) and the Emergency Tenant Protection Act (L 1974, ch 576, § 4 [§ 10, subd 1], as amd by L 1983, ch 403), a landlord may no longer evict a tenant in good faith for his own necessary use or that of his immediate family where a member of the tenant's household is 62 years of age or older, has been a tenant for 20 years or more, or has a medically demonstrable impairment resulting from anatomical, physiological or psychological conditions which is expected to be permanent and prevents the tenant from engaging in substantial gainful employment (L 1984, ch 234)".

Inasmuch as the tenants were in possession of their apartment on the statute's effective date, the newly enacted amendments are applicable to this proceeding (L 1984, ch 234, § 4) and bar the eviction of these rent-controlled tenants. Bracken, J.P., O'Connor, Rubin and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Brandeis v. Joy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 1, 1985
112 A.D.2d 126 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)
Case details for

Brandeis v. Joy

Case Details

Full title:ESTELLE BRANDEIS et al., Respondents, v. DANIEL W. JOY, as Commissioner of…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jul 1, 1985

Citations

112 A.D.2d 126 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Citing Cases

Matter of Gianelli v. Higgins

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs. The issue of whether Emma Santo was a tenant in a…