URENA v. ASC PROPERTIES (2018)

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, New York,

Ramon URENA, Petitioner–Respondent, v. ASC PROPERTIES, Respondent–Appellant.

570649 /17

Decided: March 28, 2018

PRESENT: Ling–Cohan, J.P., Gonzalez, Cooper, JJ.

Order (Enedina Pilar Sanchez, J.), entered on or about November 10, 2016, affirmed, with $10 costs.

Giving due deference to the hearing court's express findings of fact and credibility, we find no basis to disturb the court's determination that petitioner was in actual possession (RPAPL 713[10] ) of the subject apartment at the time of the two separate lockouts, and that the surrender of possession by the (nonparty) tenants of record occurred after the second lockout. Thus petitioner was properly restored to possession (see Hip Hop Fries Shop, Inc. v. Gibbons Realty Corp., 13 Misc 3d 128[A], 2006 NY Slip Op 51720[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2006] ).

In affirming the order of restoration, we express no view as to petitioner's ultimate status.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

Per Curiam.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network