Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

1212 Grand Concourse LLC v. Ynguil, 27 Misc. 3d 205 (2010)

Citation
1212 Grand Concourse LLC v. Ynguil, 27 Misc. 3d 205 (2010)
Parent Document
1212 Grand Concourse LLC v. Ynguil, 27 Misc. 3d 205 (2010)
Jurisdiction
New York (state)
Effective Date
2010-01-08

Other Sections in This Document (40)

Full Text

984 chars
The NYCHA in its own right as a co-respondent provides additional arguments favoring dismissal. Whereas the tenants look to the Rent Stabilization Code to support the claim that the petitioners must have a “good cause” basis to evict them, the NYCHA focuses its argument on the duties of the petitioners defined under the Williams Second Partial Consent Judgment. (See Williams v New York City Hous. Auth., 81 Civ 1801, Second Partial Consent Judgment, signed Feb. 2, 1995, attached as exhibit A to affirmation in support of respondents’ motion to dismiss and in opposition to petitioners’ cross motion, dated Nov. 13, 2009 ['Williams Second Consent Judgment].) NYCHA points out that the petitioners are bound by the Williams Second Consent Judgment, which requires a petitioner seeking to evict a Section 8 tenant to have a “good cause” basis for doing so, and that such a petitioner must, as well, certify the basis of its claim to the NYCHA. (See Williams Second Consent Judgment.)