Opinion
12-10-2015
Jamel MOORE, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY, et al., Defendants–Respondents.
Seymour W. James, Jr., The Legal Aid Society, New York (Sarah R. Robinson of counsel), for appellant. David Farber, New York City Housing Authority Law Department, New York (Jane E. Lippman of counsel), for respondents.
Seymour W. James, Jr., The Legal Aid Society, New York (Sarah R. Robinson of counsel), for appellant.
David Farber, New York City Housing Authority Law Department, New York (Jane E. Lippman of counsel), for respondents.
Opinion
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan M. Kenney, J.), entered July 17, 2014, which, in this hybrid action and CPLR article 78 proceeding, granted defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint asserting claims for violation of Federal, State, and City anti-discrimination laws, and seeking, inter alia, to annul the determination to terminate plaintiff's tenancy, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Substantial evidence supports the finding that plaintiff violated his lease, agency rules and was a nondesirable tenant (see generally 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v. State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176, 408 N.Y.S.2d 54, 379 N.E.2d 1183 [1978]; Matter of Hobbs v. New York City Hous. Auth., 128 A.D.3d 582, 10 N.Y.S.3d 58 [1st Dept.2015] ). The record shows, among other things, that plaintiff started a fire inside his apartment and barricaded himself inside placing himself and others at risk.
Defendants permissibly refused to accommodate plaintiff by continuing his tenancy subject to probationary monitoring of his mental health treatment (see Hobbs, at 583, 10 N.Y.S.3d 58; Matter of Canales v. Hernandez, 13 A.D.3d 263, 787 N.Y.S.2d 261 [1st Dept.2004] ).
Under the circumstances presented, the termination of plaintiff's tenancy does not shock our sense of fairness (see Hobbs, at 583, 10 N.Y.S.3d 58).
MAZZARELLI, J.P., RICHTER, MANZANET–DANIELS, KAPNICK, JJ., concur.