In this no lease holdover, petitioner, Ms. Evadine Bailey, seeks possession of the room she rents to respondents Mr. Anthony Dixon and Ms. Tracy Lloyd. On February 4, 2015, Ms. [*2]Bailey and Ms. Lloyd appeared in court for a scheduled court appearance. On that date, Ms. Bailey and Ms. Lloyd appeared in this proceeding without the assistance of counsel ("pro se"), and entered into a stipulation of settlement. The stipulation provided for a possessory judgment and a monetary judgment for a sum certain, against Ms. Lloyd, who agreed to vacate the premises by March 31, 2015.

After the warrant issued and March 31, 2015 passed without Ms. Lloyd vacating the premises, Ms. Lloyd filed an Order to Show Cause seeking to stay execution of the warrant of eviction, stating "I need additional time to seek services for Mr. Dixon through Adult Protective Services ..."^[FN1] The petitioner, a senior citizen, orally opposed the motion.

Subsequently, this proceeding appeared on the court calendar on May 21, 2015, as the New York City Human Resources Administration, Department of Social Services ("HRA")^[FN2] moved for the appointment of a Guardian Ad Litem, to protect the rights and interests of the respondent, Mr. Dixon.

In the instant application before the court, HRA moves for a Guardian Ad Litem to be appointed for respondent, Mr. Dixon. Petitioner does not oppose the application. Accordingly, the application by HRA was granted, and by a decision/order dated May 27, 2015, this court appointed Ms. Shani R. Friedman as the Guardian Ad Litem for Mr. Dixon, to protect his rights and interests in the instant holdover proceeding.

It is the responsibility of this court to note on this record, that the co-respondent, Ms. Tracy Lloyd made several outbursts in the courtroom, on the record, while court was in session and was therefore removed from the courtroom. Additionally, the record reflects that, as Ms. Lloyd exited the courtroom, she continued to shout and disrupt court proceedings.^[FN3]

Following Ms. Lloyd's outbursts and removal from the courtroom, petitioner stated that she has witnessed Ms. Lloyd and/or Ms. Lloyd's guests, throw items such as shoes at Mr. Dixon, a 67 year old senior citizen. Ms. Bailey also stated that she has witnessed Ms. Lloyd and/or Ms. Lloyd's guests physically remove Mr. Dixon from the premises and force him to sleep outside at night in the cold weather, and that Ms. Lloyd confiscates Mr. Dixon's monthly financial benefits assistance and only gives him money to purchase cigarettes. Alarmed by the allegations, the court asked Mr. Dixon if the allegations made by Ms. Bailey were true. Mr. Dixon informed the [*3]court that they were.^[FN4]

Concerned, with the serious charge that Mr. Dixon is being abused in his home, as so many elders are,^[FN5] this court asked the attorney for HRA, as the representative of the administration that is responsible to protect our seniors, if more could be done by the department, beyond requesting that this court appoint a Guardian Ad Litem, to protect Mr. Dixon, a vulnerable senior, in this holdover proceeding.^[FN6]

Counsel for HRA, Patrick C. Cento, Esq.,^[FN7] seemed to share the court's concern, and called his supervisor, who within an hour, dispatched a team of three (3) employees from HRA to conduct an emergency evaluation of Mr. Dixon.^[FN8] The representatives from HRA met with Mr. Dixon in private, and following their evaluation, proposed several options to protect Mr. Dixon, and keep him safe.

Upon the completion of the HRA team's emergency evaluation, Ms. Lloyd was permitted back into the court room and the proceedings continued on the record. This court inquired as to the course, if any, Team HRA, deemed appropriate to immediately protect Mr. Dixon.^[FN9] Team [*4]HRA provided several options, including immediately notifying the New York Police Department ("NYPD") Captain-in-Charge of the Domestic Violence Unit of the local Police Precinct; and to partner with "JASA"^[FN10] to secure an order of protection in favor of Mr. Dixon against Ms. Lloyd, arrange for "unannounced visits" to the subject premises, and commence an Article 81 proceeding.^[FN11]

The court permitted Ms. Lloyd to make a statement on the record, which was followed by Mr. Dixon's statement that Ms. Lloyd is not abusing him and he does not want to move forward with any charges against her.

It is of no moment to this court that following the emergency examination by Team HRA, Mr. Dixon stated that he did not want to formally complain of being a victim of elder abuse at the hands of Ms. Lloyd.^[FN13] Indeed, even if Mr. Dixon unequivocally denied each specific allegation that gave this court and the attorney from HRA reason to pause, this court, HRA, and the public, have an obligation to identify possible signs of abuse, including elder abuse ^[FN14] and recognize that where an individual, demonstrates violent behavior in public, it may be an illustration of the individual's temperament towards others in private ^[FN15] this is even more so when the disruptive behavior is coupled with an eyewitness account of actual harm.

It is the duty of the court, government agencies and individuals, to make proper inquiries when there is a possibility that the special needs of an older adult, are not properly being met, and to reach out to those authorized to provide that assistance to ensure that the vulnerable senior receives proper assistance and is safe.

It has long been said, that "it takes a village to raise a child."^[FN16] Indeed, recent literature supports that "[r]esearch shows [that] children need four to six involved, caring adults in their life to fully develop emotionally and socially.... [and y]oung people need someone with whom they can feel emotionally safe..."^[FN17] To this court, it is equally important that the elders of our community are surrounded by individuals "with whom they [are] safe." Because it is the village, that is responsible to care for it's community, it is up to each member of the village (community) to say something, if he or she sees something, that is wrong. This responsibility applies equally to our children, our elders and all members of our community that need help to protect themselves.

Based upon the foregoing, this court issued an interim order, which vacated the stay of execution of the warrant of eviction against Ms. Lloyd. As Mr. Dixon did not appear in court until May 21, 2015 and was not a signatory to the February 4, 2015 stipulation, the issued warrant of eviction may not be executed against him.

This matter shall be restored to the court calendar on Part R room 403 on June 18, 2015 at 9:30 AM for all purposes.

The foregoing constitutes the decision and order of the court.Dated:Brooklyn, NY

______/s/______________