Opinion
2011-10-25
In the Matter of Jamila CORTES, respondent,v.NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY, et al., appellants.
Sonya M. Kaloyanides, New York, N.Y. (Nancy M. Harnett, Corina L. Leske, and Seth E. Kramer of counsel), for appellants.
Sonya M. Kaloyanides, New York, N.Y. (Nancy M. Harnett, Corina L. Leske, and Seth E. Kramer of counsel), for appellants.
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York City Housing Authority dated January 20, 2010, which, after a hearing, denied the petitioner's grievance seeking to establish her status as a remaining family member entitled to succeed to the tenancy of her late grandmother's apartment, the New York City Housing Authority and Cooper Park Houses appeal, by permission, from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jacobson, J.), dated August 12, 2010, which directed a further hearing on factual issues.
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, and the order is vacated; and it is further,
ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, without costs or disbursements.
Since the petition raises a question of whether the challenged determination is supported by substantial evidence, the Supreme Court should have transferred the proceeding to this Court ( see CPLR 7804[g] ). Nevertheless, because the record is now before this Court, we will treat the matter as one initially transferred here and will review the administrative determination de novo ( see Matter of Blake v. New York City Hous. Auth., 78 A.D.3d 1175, 911 N.Y.S.2d 659; Matter of Roman v. New York City Hous. Auth., 63 A.D.3d 845, 846, 881 N.Y.S.2d 451).
There is substantial evidence in the record to support the determination of the
New York City Housing Authority (hereinafter the NYCHA) that the petitioner did not obtain the requisite written approval of the housing manager of the public housing development in which she lived to become a permanent member of her grandmother's household and did not thereafter continuously occupy her grandmother's apartment for a period of at least one year prior to her grandmother's death ( see Matter of Roman v. New York City Hous. Auth., 63 A.D.3d at 846, 881 N.Y.S.2d 451; Matter of Hargrove v. Van Dyke Hous., 63 A.D.3d 741, 742, 880 N.Y.S.2d 156; Matter of Torres v. Hernandez, 55 A.D.3d 452, 452–453, 866 N.Y.S.2d 163). Accordingly, the petitioner could not succeed to the tenancy of her late grandmother's apartment as a remaining family member, and the NYCHA correctly denied her grievance ( see Matter of Roman v. New York City Hous. Auth., 63 A.D.3d at 846, 881 N.Y.S.2d 451).
In light of our determination, we need not address the appellants' remaining contentions.