New York City Hous. Auth. v Hall (2013 NY Slip Op 51272(U))

New York City Hous. Auth. v Hall

2013 NY Slip Op 51272(U) [40 Misc 3d 135(A)]

Decided on July 31, 2013

Appellate Term, Second 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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 2d, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

New York City Housing Authority, Kingsborough Houses, Respondent, —

against

Reginald Hall, Appellant.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Thomas M. Fitzpatrick, J.), dated April 12, 2012. The order denied tenant's motion to, in effect, vacate a stipulation of settlement and the final judgment entered pursuant thereto.

In this holdover proceeding to remove a New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) tenant who had been found ineligible for continued occupancy, the parties entered into a stipulation of settlement on August 11, 2011 wherein they agreed, among other things, that a final judgment of possession would be entered in landlord's favor and that tenant would voluntarily vacate the premises on or before February 24, 2012. A final judgment of possession was entered on August 11, 2011, and the warrant of eviction was stayed pursuant to the terms of the stipulation. In March 2012, tenant moved to, in effect, vacate the stipulation and final judgment. The Civil Court denied tenant's motion by order dated April 12, 2012, and tenant was evicted from the premises on June 14, 2012.

Settlement stipulations are favored and will not be undone absent proof that the [*2]settlement was obtained by fraud, collusion, mistake, accident or other ground sufficient to invalidate a contract (see Hallock v State of New York, 64 NY2d 224 [1984]; Matter of Frutiger, 29 NY2d 143 [1971]). Tenant has not set forth any such basis to invalidate the stipulation entered into in this proceeding, as NYCHA's administrative determination to terminate tenant's tenancy is subject to review only in a CPLR article 78 proceeding and cannot be collaterally attacked in a subsequent summary proceeding (see New York City Hous. Auth. v O'Connor, 18 Misc 3d 132[A], 2008 NY Slip Op 50081[U] [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2008]; see also New York City Hous. Auth. (Douglas II Houses) v White, 30 Misc 3d 132[A], 2011 NY Slip Op 50041[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2011]). Consequently, the Civil Court properly denied tenant's motion to, in effect, vacate the stipulation of settlement and final judgment.