Development] regulations to a monthly rent subsidy which Petitioner "has either illegally
canceled" or failed to credit "and/or has illegally failed to properly process and submit
Respondent's Annual Income Certification"; a second affirmative defense that Petitioner illegally
refused to process Respondent's request to add her nephew to her household composition; a third
affirmative defense that Petitioner's attempt to compel Respondent to relocate was illegal as it
relied upon a defective notice, offered an apartment that was "legally unfit for occupancy" and
resulted in the illegal cancelation, removal or failure to credit the rent subsidy upon Respondent's
"legal and justifiable refusal to relocate"; a fourth affirmative defense that Petitioner violated
Respondent's due process rights under both the U.S. and New York State Constitutions by failing
to give her proper notice of the termination of her HUD rent subsidy; a fifth affirmative defense
and two counterclaims based on breach of the warranty of habitability, seeking affirmative relief
of a 50% rent abatement and an order to correct violations; and a counterclaim for costs,
disbursements and fees.
Motion practice followed. Petitioner's motion for summary judgment and other relief [*3]was denied by Decision and Order of February 28, 2018. By
Decision and Order of December 3, 2018 the court granted both Petitioner's motion to quash
Respondent's subpoena for documents regarding the termination of her rent subsidy and proposed
relocation and Respondent's cross-motion for discovery seeking essentially the same documents.
After a series of additional adjournments for various reasons [FN2]
the trial took place on May 30, 2019, July 26, 2019 and January 3, 2020.
TRIAL
Petitioner's Case