settlement on or about August 21, 2001 (2001 Stipulation), wherein Respondent was represented
by counsel. The 2001 Stipulation was so-ordered by the court, and recorded with the City clerk's
office. The 2001 Stipulation provides that Respondent is the tenant of the Subject Premises, and
would be treated as if his tenancy were governed by Rent Stabilization. The 2001 Stipulation
further provided that Respondent would be entitled to lease renewals on the same terms as if his
tenancy were governed by Rent Stabilization, and that his tenancy could only be terminated on a
basis permitted by Rent Stabilization, including but not limited to a determination by the owner
not to renew his lease based a need to use the premises as the owner's primary residence.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Petitioner issued a combined notice of termination and notice of non-renewal on or about
September 29, 2008. The notice asserts that Petitioner and his family currently reside on the
second, third and fourth floors of the subject building, and that Petitioner wishes to enlarge his
family residence and have access to the backyard. The subject building is a two family dwelling.
The notice of petition and petition issued on or about February 6, 2009.
On or about March 18, 2009, Respondent appeared by counsel, Kenneth Rosenfeld, Esq. of
Northern Manhattan Improvement Corporation, and filed an answer and counterclaim.
Respondent's answer included an affirmative defense that he suffered from a permanent
impairment as defined by § 2520.6 (q) of the Rent Stabilization Code, and that Petitioner
was required to offer Respondent an alternative housing accommodation in accordance with
§2524.4(a) of the Rent Stabilization Code.
On or about June 2, 2009, Respondent's counsel moved for an order appointing a