Terry Pappas, Petitioner, v. Thomas Mullaney, Respondents. (2026)

After reviewing the papers, the Court grants Ronnie Pappas' motion to substitute under CPLR § 1021 Petitioner Terry Pappas for himself.

Facts and Procedural History

On September 5, 2024, Petitioner Terry Pappas, the tenant of a rent-controlled apartment, commenced the instant holdover proceeding, seeking to terminate Respondent Thomas Mullany, Petitioner's nephew, tenancy. Petitioner allowed his nephew to reside in one of the premises' bedrooms.¹ Respondent filed an answer raising the following defenses: (1) Petitioner is not the landlord; (2) acceptance of rental payments; (3) succession; and (4) retaliation.² On October 15, 2025, the court conducted the trial.

At trial, Terry Pappas testified that he currently resides with his brother Ronnie Pappas aka Peter Pappas since 2012.³ He testified Respondent moved in 2013.⁴ Respondent testified that both Petitioner and Ronnie Pappas were residing in the subject premises prior to him moving in.⁵

On November 12, 2025, the Honorable Tashanna Golden filed a Decision/Order, issuing a judgment of possession in favor of Petitioner.⁶ The court found Petitioner Terry Pappas' "credibly testified that he is the tenant of record and he has the authority to commence the instant [proceeding]."⁷ The court dismissed each of Respondent's defenses, including his succession claim.⁸ Regarding Respondent's succession claim, the Court found that Terry Pappas never vacated his rent-controlled apartment prohibiting any succession claims to the premises.  ⁹ The Court issued an eviction warrant against Respondent which provided an earliest execution date of January 15, 2026.¹⁰ On February 23, 2026, the city marshal served a fourteen day notice of eviction, which provided that the eviction could occur as early as March 10, 2026.¹¹ On March 9, 2026, Respondent filed an Order to Show Cause (OSC) to Restore to the Calendar, seeking a stay of the eviction pending their appeal.¹² The Court calendared Respondent's OSC for March 17, 2026.¹³ On the return date, this Court heard arguments and took Respondent's OSC seeking a stay on submission.

On April 3, 2026, prior to any decision on Respondent's OSC for a stay, Petitioner's attorney moved to substitute Petitioner Terry Pappas with his brother Ronnie Pappas.¹⁴ On March 18, 2026, a day after this Court heard arguments on Respondent's stay motion, Petitioner Terry Pappas died.¹⁵ Ronnie Pappas now moves to be substituted into the proceeding in place of his deceased brother, Terry Pappas, as his successor in interest.¹⁶ Ronnie Pappas' motion was made returnable on April 21, 2026.¹⁷ On the return date, the Court denied Respondent's earlier motion for a stay pending appeal. However, did not vacate the stay of the warrant's execution.¹⁸ The Court adjourned the matter to May 26, 2026, providing both Ronnie Pappas and Respondent to provide an additional briefing on whether Ronnie Pappas could be substituted for the deceased Petitioner. On May 26, 2026, the Court reserved its decision on Ronnie Pappas' motion to substitute.

Legal Discussion

CPLR § 1021 states, "A motion for substitution may be made by the successors or representatives of a party or by any party." In Duell v. Condon,¹⁹ the Court of Appeal found that, unlike rent stabilized tenancies, which are contractual in nature, the laws governing rent control create "statutory tenanc[ies]."²⁰ Consequently, a surviving tenant who is a qualified successor becomes the statutory tenant, by operation of law, upon the death of the original statutory tenant.²¹ In 170 Spring St. LLC v. Doe,²² the court found in the rent control context that the successor tenant's statutory tenancy vested upon the death of her grandmother, obligating them to pay rent at the time of said death.²³ Likewise, in Golden Mtn. Realty Inc. v Severino,²⁴ the court found that a qualified family member "succeeds to the decedent tenant's rights."

For a tenant to be considered a qualified successor to a rent-controlled apartment, they must comply with 9 NYCRR § 2204.6, which states as follows:

(d)(1) any member of the tenant's family, as defined in paragraph (3) of this subdivision, shall not be evicted under this section where the tenant has permanently vacated, the housing accommodation and such family member has resided with the tenant in the housing accommodation as a primary residence for a period of no less than two years, immediately prior to the permanent vacating of the housing accommodation by the tenant .

The statute further reads:

(3)(i) "family member" is defined as a spouse, son, daughter, stepson, stepdaughter, father, mother, stepfather, stepmother, brother, sister, grandfather, grandmother, grandson, granddaughter, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, or daughter-in-law of the tenant; or any other person residing with the tenant in the housing accommodation as a primary residence who can prove emotional and financial commitment, and interdependence between such person and the tenant.

Here, in this proceeding, Ronnie Pappas is a qualified successor to Petitioner Terry Pappas rent-controlled apartment. After trial, the court found that Petitioner Terry Pappas was the "tenant of record" of the subject premises.²⁵ The court also found Ronnie Pappas resided with Petitioner Terry Pappas at the subject premises prior to Respondent taking residency in 2013.²⁶ Terry Pappas' testimony supported the finding that his brother Ronnie Pappas moved into the premises in 2012.²⁷ Respondent, at trial, did not dispute that: (1) Ronnie Pappas lived with Terry Pappas prior to him moving in;²⁸ and (2) Petitioner Terry Pappas and Ronnie Pappas are brothers.²⁹ Since Petitioner Terry Pappas died on March 18, 2026, fourteen years after his brother Ronnie Pappas moved in, Ronnie Pappas is a qualified successor as defined by 9 NYCRR § 2204.6. Consequently, Ronnie Pappas under CPLR § 1021 may be substituted as a successor in interest to Petitioner. Accordingly, the Court grants Ronnie Pappas' motion to substitute himself for Petitioner Terry Pappas.

Notwithstanding the above, it is undisputed that Respondent, despite an issuance of a warrant, which has been stayed since March 9, 2026, has never vacated the apartment and currently resides at the subject premises after Petitioner's Terry Pappas' death.³⁰ It is also undisputed that Respondent has resided with Petitioner since 2013, thirteen years preceding Petitioner's death. Though Respondent is not considered a traditional family member of Petitioner, he may demonstrate he is Petitioner's non-traditional family member "who can prove emotional and financial commitment, and interdependence between such person and [them]."³¹ 9 NYCRR § 2204.6 states "any member of the tenant's family shall not be evicted under this section where the tenant has permanently vacated."³²

The trial court denied Respondent's succession claim because Respondent was unable to show that either his grandfather or his mother were the proper tenants of record to which he could succeed.³³ The trial court found Petitioner Terry Pappas was the proper tenant of record and since he had not vacated Respondent could not claim succession.³⁴ Because Respondent never raised succession as against Petitioner Terry Pappas, he is not precluded from doing so now.³⁵ On the present record, the Court is not prepared to determine, as a matter of law, whether Respondent is a successor to Terry Pappas.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the Court grants Ronnie Pappas' motion to be substituted for Petitioner Terry Pappas. The Court hereby amends the petition nun pro tunc. Furthermore, the judgment and warrant are also hereby amended nun pro tunc substituting Terry Pappas for Ronnie Pappas. Notwithstanding the above, the stay on the execution of the warrant remains in full force and effect upon a hearing on whether Respondent can show a non-traditional family relationship with the deceased former tenant of record Terry Pappas. The Court adjourns this matter to October 23, 2026, at 9:30 a.m. for trial on the limited purpose on whether Respondent has a vested

succession claim as stated above.

Dated: September 21, 2026

Brooklyn, New York

TRAVIS J. ARRINDELL

JHC

FOOTNOTES

1.    See Petitioner's Petition (NYSCEF Doc. No. 1).

2.    See Respondent's Answer (NYSCEF Doc. No. 6).

3.    Id., at pg. 2.

4.    Id.

5.    Id., at pg. 3.

6.    Decision/Order

7.    Id., at pg. 4.

8.    Id., at pg. 5.

9.    Id.

10.    Id., at pg. 7.

11.   NYSCEF Doc. No. 18.

12.    See Respondent's OSC to Restore to the Calendar (NYSCEF Doc. No. 19).

13.    Id.

14.    See Notice of Motion (NYSCEF Doc. No. 34); see also Petitioner's Attorney's Affirmation in Support of Motion to Substitute (NYSCEF Doc. No. 35).

15.   See Certificate of Death (NYSCEF Doc. No. 37).

16.    See Notice of Motion (NYSCEF Doc. No. 34); see also Petitioner's Attorney's Affirmation in Support of Motion to Substitute (NYSCEF Doc. No. 35).

17.    Id.

18.   NYSCEF Doc. No. 43.

19.   84 NY2d 773 (1995).

20.    Id., at 779.

21.    170 Spring St. LLC v. Doe, 2022 NY Misc. LEXIS 6167, *2 (2022)

22.   2022 NY Misc. LEXIS 6167 (2022).

23.    Id.

24.   47 Misc 3d 141(A) (2015)

25.    Decision/Order, at pg. 5.

26.    Id., at pg. 3. (Respondent's own testimony concedes that Ronnie Pappas resided with Terry Pappas prior to his tenancy).

27.    Id., at pg. 2.

28.    Decision/Order, at pg. 3.

29.    FTR dated October 15, 2025, 3:39:51 p.m. (Respondent's cross-examination of Petitioner, acknowledges that Petitioner, his mother, and Ronnie Pappas aka Peter Pappas are siblings.); also FTR 3:43:54 p.m. (Admits that his other "uncle Peter" aka Ronnie Pappas resided also at the property with Petitioner).

30.    See Respondent's OSC to Restore to the Calendar (NYSCEF Doc. No. 19).

31.   9 NYCRR § 2204.6

32.    Emphasis added.

33.    Decision/Order, at pg. 5.

34.    Id.

35.   This Court notes that the trial court stated to Respondent that he may have a competing claim for succession with Ronnie Pappas if Petitioner Terry Pappas were to die. FTR October 15, 2025, at 3:58:05 p.m.

Travis J. Arrindell, J.