| Urena v ASC Props. |
| 2018 NY Slip Op 50398(U) [59 Misc 3d 128(A)] |
| Decided on March 28, 2018 |
| Appellate Term, First 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| This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports. |
Respondent ASC Properties appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Enedina Pilar Sanchez, J.), entered on or about November 10, 2016, after a hearing, which granted petitioner's motion to be restored to possession in an illegal lockout proceeding.
Per Curiam.
Order (Enedina Pilar Sanchez, J.), entered on or about November 10, 2016, affirmed, with $10 costs.
Giving due deference to the hearing court's express findings of fact and credibility, we find no basis to disturb the court's determination that petitioner was in actual possession (RPAPL 713[10]) of the subject apartment at the time of the two separate lockouts, and that the surrender of possession by the (nonparty) tenants of record occurred after the second lockout. Thus petitioner was properly restored to possession (see Hip Hop Fries Shop, Inc. v Gibbons Realty Corp., 13 Misc 3d 128[A], 2006 NY Slip Op 51720[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2006]).
In affirming the order of restoration, we express no view as to petitioner's ultimate status.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.