Tenant appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Paul Alpert, J.), dated March 10, 2005, which denied her motion to dismiss the petition and granted landlord's cross motion to amend the petition in a nuisance holdover summary proceeding. Tenant appeals and landlord cross-appeals from a final judgment of the same court (Brenda S. Spears, J.), entered on or about October 6, 2005, after a nonjury trial, which awarded possession to landlord. Tenant and respondent Barbara Longo further appeal from an order (same court and Judge), dated February 27, 2006, which, inter alia, denied respondent Barbara Longo's motion to vacate her default.

Per Curiam.

Final judgment (Brenda S. Spears, J.), entered on or about October 6, 2005, and order (Brenda S. Spears, J.), dated February 27, 2006, affirmed, with one bill of $25 costs. Appeal from order (Paul Alpert, J.), dated March 10, 2005, dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the final judgment. Execution of the warrant of eviction shall be stayed on condition that tenant removes respondent Barbara Longo from the building premises within 14 days after the service of a copy of this order with notice of entry. In the event tenant fails to timely comply [*2]with this condition, landlord may move on notice for an order vacating the stay. The elderly rent regulated tenant has resided in the subject apartment for nearly 60 years. This nuisance holdover proceeding was precipitated by the misconduct of her adult daughter, defaulting respondent Barbara Longo. At trial, landlord's witnesses testified as to respondent's repeated antisocial behavior in the building's common areas, including her conduct in repeatedly vandalizing the mailbox and destroying the mail of a neighboring tenant, Becerra, conduct which led to the summoning of police and ultimately forced Becerra to surrender his leasehold in the building. Thus, a documented nuisance was shown here (see Frank v Summit Park Realty Corp., 175 AD2d 33 [1991], mod on other grounds 79 NY2d 789 [1991]). It is painfully clear from the record that tenant is incapable of controlling the respondent's actions on a daily basis and no credible plan for respondent's rehabilitation was presented below. In balancing the interests of the landlord and building residents with the extreme hardship that would result from a forfeiture in this case, we have exercised our discretion and stayed enforcement of the possessory judgment upon condition that tenant permanently removes respondent Barbara Longo from the building premises (see Shaw v Franco, 251 AD2d 156 [1998]; 15th Associates v Cintron, NYLJ, July 17, 1998, at 21, col 1 [App Term, 1st Dept]). We have considered the parties' remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

This Constitutes the Decision and Order of the Court.
Decision Date: June 16, 2008