Mitchell-Lama Co-op Tenant's Niece Can't Get Apartment

The niece of a former Mitchell-Lama shareholder tenant claimed succession rights to former tenant's apartment after the tenant moved out. The DHCR ruled against the niece, who then filed an Article 78 court appeal of the DHCR's decision. The court ruled against the niece. Under applicable regulations, a "niece" is not a category of family member who can claim succession rights to tenant's apartment. Although the niece had the right to otherwise prove a family-type relationship, her documents were insufficient to prove emotional and financial commitment and interdependence between herself and the former tenant.  The niece also didn't show that she lived in the apartment with tenant during the required two-year period before tenant moved out. The DHCR reasonably determined that the tenant ceased to maintain the apartment as his primary residence no later than July 31, 2015, when the Republic of the Philippines issued tenant a Permanent Resident Visa. Since the niece moved into tenant's apartment on Feb. 26, 2015, she couldn't have lived there at least two years with tenant. 

Drayton v. Visnauskas: Index No. 151795/2020, 2023 NY Slip Op 30414(U)(Sup. Ct. NY; 2/9/23; James, J)