From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cabrini Terrace Joint Venture v. O'Brien

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 11, 2010
71 A.D.3d 486 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)

Summary

In Cabrini v. O'Brien, 71 A.D.3d 486 (1st Dep't 2010), the trial court found that there was a roach and rodent infestation as well as faulty wiring in respondent's apartment and that he caused clutter, offensive odors, and refused access to the landlord, thus committing a nuisance as well as breaching his lease.

Summary of this case from GME Realty LLC v. Rodriguez

Opinion

No. 2341.

March 11, 2010.

Order of the Appellate Term of the Supreme Court, First Department, entered April 30, 2009, which affirmed a judgment, Civil Court, New York County (Gerald Lebovits, J.), entered on or about March 7, 2008, after a nonjury trial, awarding petitioner possession, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Charles O'Brien, Bronx, appellant pro se.

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., New York (Jeffrey R. Metz of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Moskowitz, Acosta and Renwick, JJ.


The trial court's findings, based largely on credibility, are not against the weight of the evidence ( see Thoreson v Penthouse Intl., 80 NY2d 490, 495). The conditions in tenant's apartment were properly found harmful to the health, safety and comfort of others based on testimony of roach and rodent infestation, clutter, offensive odors, and stacked newspapers and wiring in disarray, as well as of tenant's refusal of access ( see 12 Broadway Realty, LLC v Levites, 44 AD3d 372; Zipper v Haroldon Ct. Condominium, 39 AD3d 325, lv dismissed 9 NY3d 919; Stratton Coop, v Fener, 211 AD2d 559). A posttrial opportunity to cure was properly denied upon a finding, based on the testimony and the trial court's own inspection, that the nuisance conditions had existed over a substantial period, had not abated although tenant had been given ample opportunity to do so, and were unlikely to be abated ( see Matter of Chi-Am Realty, LLC v Guddahl, 33 AD3d 911, 912, citing, inter alia, Stratton, 211 AD2d 559, supra; see also Zipper, 39 AD3d at 326). Tenant's contentions regarding the admissibility of evidence are unavailing.

[Prior Case History: 23 Misc 3d 136(A), 2009 NY Slip Op 50827(U).]


Summaries of

Cabrini Terrace Joint Venture v. O'Brien

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 11, 2010
71 A.D.3d 486 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)

In Cabrini v. O'Brien, 71 A.D.3d 486 (1st Dep't 2010), the trial court found that there was a roach and rodent infestation as well as faulty wiring in respondent's apartment and that he caused clutter, offensive odors, and refused access to the landlord, thus committing a nuisance as well as breaching his lease.

Summary of this case from GME Realty LLC v. Rodriguez
Case details for

Cabrini Terrace Joint Venture v. O'Brien

Case Details

Full title:CABRINI TERRACE JOINT VENTURE, Respondent, v. CHARLES O'BRIEN, Appellant

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

Date published: Mar 11, 2010

Citations

71 A.D.3d 486 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 1891
896 N.Y.S.2d 339

Citing Cases

222 E. 12 Realty v. Yuk Kwan so

The stipulation, properly construed by Civil Court under settled contract principles (see Hotel Cameron, Inc.…

Strata Realty Corp. v. Pena

Inasmuch as the underlying conditions in the apartment for which repairs were required, including the removal…