[*1]
Caru, LLC. v Ramos
2007 NY Slip Op 50280(U) [14 Misc 3d 138(A)]
Decided on February 21, 2007
Appellate Term, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.


Decided on February 21, 2007
APPELLATE TERM OF THE SUPREME COURT, FIRST DEPARTMENT

PRESENT: McKEON, P.J., McCOOE, SCHOENFELD, JJ
570552/06.

Caru, LLC., Petitioner-Appellant, --

against

Vivian Ramos, Respondent-Respondent.


Petitioner appeals from a final judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Sheldon J. Halprin, J.), entered on or about February 14, 2006, after a nonjury trial, which dismissed the petition in a holdover summary proceeding.


Per Curiam :

Final judgment (Sheldon J. Halprin, J.), entered on or about February 14, 2006, reversed, with $30 costs, and final judgment of possession awarded to petitioner.

Based upon the evidence adduced at trial and in the exercise of our authority to render the judgment warranted by the facts (see Northern Westchester Professional Park Assoc. v Town of Bedford, 60 NY2d 492, 499 [1983]), we conclude that respondent Ramos failed to meet her affirmative obligation of establishing succession rights to the subject Manhattan rent stabilized apartment as a non-traditional family member of the deceased tenant (see 9 NYCRR 2523.5[e]). While the two may have had a close, loving relationship, there was no showing on this record that they intermingled their finances, formalized legal obligations or jointly owned property (see GSL Enterprises v Lopez, 239 AD2d 122 [1997]). Moreover, the undisputed evidence showed that respondent was the tenant of record of a rent stabilized apartment located at East 85th Street at all relevant times and, indeed, renewed the lease to the 85th Street apartment after tenant's death. Significantly, all the documentary evidence presented at trial, including tax returns, driver's license, voter registration, banking and credit card statements, and tenant's health care proxy and will, listed respondent's address at the 85th Street apartment.

This constitutes the decision and order of the Court.
Decision Date: February 21, 2007