Tenant appeals from a final judgment of the Civil Court, New York County, entered on or about February 26, 2003 after a nonjury trial (Cyril K. Bedford, J.) awarding landlord possession of the subject apartment in an owner occupancy holdover proceeding.

PER CURIAM:

Final judgment entered on or about February 26, 2003 (Cyril K. Bedford, J.) affirmed, with $25 costs.

The evidence, fairly considered, supports the trial court's determination that the landlord genuinely intends to recover the subject apartment for the use of her adult son and daughter-in-law as their primary residence. The court, as finder of fact, was warranted in resolving the fact-based issue of good faith in the landlord's favor, and in expressly "recogniz[ing]" the landlord's "intent of having her children close to her in her building". A [*2]finding of a lack of good faith is not mandated by either the claimed availability of other apartments in the building (see Matter of Berlinrut v Leventhal, 43 AD2d 522 [1973]) or any prior discord between the parties. Nor is it fatal to the landlord's otherwise persuasive owner use claim that at the time of trial her daughter-in-law was not actively pursuing her stated plan to attend business school — one of the factors specified in the underlying notice of nonrenewal in support of the landlord's possessory claim. "Absolute synchronicity" between the trial evidence and the allegations set out in a predicate notice is not required (see Rocky 116 L.L.C. v Weston, 195 Misc 2d 363, 365 [2003]).

We have considered and rejected the tenant's remaining argument.

This constitutes the decision and order of the court.