Landlord sued to evict rent-controlled tenant's son after tenant died in 2021. The son claimed that he was disabled, had lived in the apartment with tenant before she died for at least one year, and that the one-year cohabitation requirement, rather than a two-year requirement, should apply. The parties disputed the definition of "disabled person" for this purpose, and asked the court for a pre-trial ruling on what that meant.

Landlord sued to evict tenant's son after tenant died. The building was a former NYCHA development that underwent a conversion to a privately managed Section 8 program under the Permanent Affordability Commitment Together (PACT) program in November 2020. The son claimed that he had moved into the apartment with tenant in 1977 and had lived with her there until her death in July 2021. Both tenant and the son were included on the household composition documents filed with NYCHA.

Landlord sued to evict tenant's sons from project-based Section 8 NYCHA housing after tenant died, claiming that the sons were merely licensees. The sons claimed succession rights to the apartment. Landlord pointed out that tenant didn't list the sons on any annual household composition recertification documents before he died. The court ruled for the sons after trial, noting that since this was a project-based Section 8 unit, there was case law supporting continuation of the subsidy to remaining family members.

Rent-stabilized tenant's husband filed a lease violation complaint with the DHCR after tenant died. The husband claimed that landlord refused former tenant's request to add the husband to a renewal lease, and refused to give him a renewal lease when he presented a copy of tenant's death certificate dated Feb. 26, 2025. The death certificate listed him as tenant's husband. The husband also submitted proof that he had lived in the apartment for two years before tenant passed away and that he was entitled to succession rights.

Landlord sued to evict rent-controlled tenant's family member some time after tenant died. The court granted landlord's request to conduct pretrial questioning. The family member appealed and won in part. Landlord showed it had "ample need" for document production since it was clear that the family member had particular knowledge that could shed light on the occupancy issues raised in connection with his succession claim.

Prior rent-stabilized tenant Phillipe moved into an apartment in 1978. In 2008 Phillipe and his daughter became co-tenants when they signed a two-year renewal lease. Phillipe also had married in 2006. His wife and stepdaughter moved into the apartment at that time. Phillipe died in 2009 and his daughter signed four subsequent two-year renewal leases as the sole tenant. In 2018, landlord sued to evict the tenant daughter based on nonprimary residence. The daughter stipulated with landlord that she no longer lived in the apartment. But the stepdaughter claimed succession rights.

The daughter of a deceased rent-stabilized tenant claimed succession rights and complained to the DHCR that landlord refused to give her a renewal lease after tenant died. The DRA ruled against the daughter, who appealed and lost. The daughter never responded to the DRA's Request for Additional Information/Evidence (RFAI), which requested copies of a government photo ID, driver's license, tenant's death certificate, birth certificate showing the daughter's relationship to tenant, income tax returns and W-2 form, payroll records, and Social Security statement.

The daughter of a rent-stabilized tenant claimed succession rights and complained to the DHCR that landlord failed to offer her a renewal lease after tenant died. The DRA ruled for the daughter.

Landlord sued the wife of a deceased rent-stabilized tenant in State Supreme Court in order to recover the apartment. Landlord sought declaratory relief, a money judgment, possession of the apartment, and a finding of fraud against the wife. The wife asked the court to dismiss the case, arguing that it should have been brought in housing court, not Supreme Court.

HPD held a hearing in response to landlord's request for a certification of eviction for a Mitchell-Lama unit and heard occupant's claim for succession rights to tenant's apartment. HPD ruled for landlord and against the occupant, so that landlord could commence housing court proceedings against the occupant. Occupant filed an Article 78 court appeal of HPD's decision, claiming that it wasn't based on substantial evidence.