Tenant appeals from a final judgment of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Sheldon J. Halprin, J.), entered July 6, 2007, after a nonjury trial, which awarded possession to landlord in a holdover summary proceeding.

Per Curiam.

Final judgment (Sheldon J. Halprin, J.), entered July 6, 2007, affirmed, with $25 costs.

A fair interpretation of the voluminous trial evidence supports the trial court's fact-laden determination that the subject building was substantially rehabilitated by landlord's predecessor after January 1, 1974, and thus exempt from rent stabilization (see Rent Stabilization Code [9 NYCRR] § 2520.11[e]; Cassorla v Foster, 2 Misc 3d 65 [2004]). The evidence was sufficient to establish that the prior owner spent over $200,000 to rehabilitate all of the building's major systems, so as to convert commercial space to a "class A" multiple dwelling and to qualify for a J-51 tax abatement. We agree that tenant's evidence was insufficient to establish that the pre-1974 renovation activities performed by tenants, which admittedly did not involve any building-wide systems, constituted a substantial rehabilitation (cf. Wilson v One Ten Duane Street Realty Co., 123 AD2d 198 [1987]).

Finally, inasmuch as tenant took occupancy several years after expiration of the J-51 tax abatement, the court properly determined that her tenancy was unregulated (see Ogando v Pamela Equities Corp., 44 AD3d 367 [2007]).

This constitutes the decision and order of the court.
I concur.
Decision Date: November 18, 2008