RIVERBAY CORPORATION v. HART (2019)

Final judgment (Kimon C. Thermos, J.), entered on or about August 13, 2018, affirmed, with $25 costs.

Giving due deference to the trial court's detailed findings of fact and credibility, we find no cause to disturb the court's ultimate determination that respondent did not breach a substantial obligation of the tenancy by violating House Rule 15, which proscribes “interfer[ing] with the rights, comforts, or convenience of the other members” (see generally Tsangarinos v. Attaway, 43 Misc 3d 142[A], 2014 NY Slip Op 50848[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2014]; CDC Dev. Co. III LLC v. Rivera, 8 Misc 3d 132[A], 2005 NY Slip Op 51151[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2005]). While the trial record shows that respondent displayed a firearm, the trial court expressly found that he did so only in an effort “to protect his own safety” against a non-resident assailant who “ruthlessly attacked him” minutes earlier in two separate incidents at the building premises and “used a weapon upon him to inflict serious bodily harm,” requiring respondent, a senior citizen, to be hospitalized for three days. The trial court correctly concluded that respondents' actions in this isolated incident, though neither wise nor prudent, did not amount to a breach of a substantial obligation of the tenancy warranting eviction, especially given that they were not directed against another member or a member of a cooperator's family, and that respondent “is not a menace or continuing threat to anyone in the building” (compare 14 Morningside Ave. H.D.F.C. v. Murray, 53 Misc 3d 149[A], 2016 NY Slip Op 51667[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2016]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

Per Curiam.