Opinion
570708/16.
12-28-2016
Charlene RICHARDSON, Petitioner–Tenant–Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY—GOMPERS HOUSES, Respondent–Landlord–Respondent.
Charlene Richardson, appellant pro se. David I. Farber, General Counsel, New York City Housing Authority, New York City (Nancy M. Harnett and Seth E. Kramer of counsel), for respondent.
Charlene Richardson, appellant pro se.
David I. Farber, General Counsel, New York City Housing Authority, New York City (Nancy M. Harnett and Seth E. Kramer of counsel), for respondent.
PRESENT: SCHOENFELD, J.P., LING–COHAN, J.
PER CURIAM.
Order (Maria Milin, J.), dated July 26, 2016, affirmed, without costs. Order (Maria Milin, J.), dated September 22, 2016, modified, by striking the condition barring tenant from filming or videotaping the required repairs to be performed by landlord; as modified, order affirmed without costs.
In the absence of any evidence that tenant's intra-apartment video surveillance system interfered with landlord's attempts to make required repairs, tenant should not have been barred from filming the repair work conducted within her apartment. There being no cause to further delay the abatement of the long-standing mold condition in tenant's bathroom and to complete other previously ordered repairs, landlord is directed to undertake this work forthwith.
We have examined tenant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.