[*1]
818 Woodward, LLC v Gerges
2017 NY Slip Op 50374(U) [55 Misc 3d 129(A)]
Decided on March 24, 2017
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This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.


Decided on March 24, 2017
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 2d, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : WESTON, J.P., ALIOTTA and ELLIOT, JJ.
2014-2706 Q C

818 Woodward, LLC, Respondent,

against

Salah Z. Gerges, Appellant.


Appeal from a decision of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Terrence C. O'Connor, J.), dated September 30, 2014, deemed from a final judgment of the same court entered October 1, 2014 (see CPLR 5512 [a]). The final judgment, after a nonjury trial, awarded landlord possession in a holdover summary proceeding.

ORDERED that the final judgment is reversed, without costs, and the matter is remitted to the Civil Court for a new trial before a different judge.

At a nonjury trial of this commercial holdover summary proceeding commenced in 2014, the parties submitted differing versions of a lease purportedly executed by the prior co-owners, which overlapped in their terms. The term of landlord's version of the lease terminated in 2010, and that of tenant, who was pro se and proceeding with the aid of an interpreter, terminated in 2018. Both versions had a copy of a rider attached, setting forth a schedule of rents through 2018. Following the trial, the Civil Court awarded landlord a final judgment of possession, concluding that, notwithstanding the rider incorporated by reference in both leases, landlord's lease was the operative lease and that it had terminated in 2010, following which tenant became a month-to-month tenant.

Upon a review of the record, we find that there were issues of fact presented, particularly with respect to reconciling the leases with the riders, which were not adequately and fairly developed, and considered by the trial judge. Consequently, a new trial is warranted before a different judge.

Accordingly, the final judgment is reversed and the matter is remitted to the Civil Court for a new trial before a different judge.

Weston, J.P., Aliotta and Elliot, JJ., concur.


Decision Date: March 24, 2017