NYCHA Coney Island Houses v. Ramos, 41 Misc. 3d 702 (2013)

Citation: NYCHA Coney Island Houses v. Ramos, 41 Misc. 3d 702 (2013)
Parent Document: NYCHA Coney Island Houses v. Ramos, 41 Misc. 3d 702 (2013)
Jurisdiction: New York (state)
Effective Date: 2013-09-16
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6314716/nycha-coney-island-houses-v-ramos/ ↗

Full Text

1,105 chars

Petitioner’s argument that the portion of respondent’s proposed answer seeking an abatement should be denied as “prejudicial” and improperly sought on “the eve of trial” (Bayley affirmation 1I1Í 2, 4) is unpersuasive. The email to petitioner’s attorney dated January 7, 2013 (referred to above), which thanked petitioner’s attorney for agreeing to adjourn the “abatement hearing” scheduled for January 8, 2013, put the petitioner on notice that the respondent was seeking an abatement of rent. There is nothing in the court file to indicate that the petitioner objected to the Legal Aid Society’s position that the matter was scheduled for an abatement hearing on that date. Additionally, the transfer order dated April 15, 2013 (four months after the email noting an abatement hearing was contemplated), states that “respondent] wants an abatement pet[ition]er does not offer anything.” Notably, the Judge that signed the transfer order (Gary Marton, J.) did not mark on the transfer order that petitioner offers nothing because of a lack of notice, as this defense was not raised in respondent’s answer.

Other Sections in This Document (70)

Full Text