Previously Incarcerated Son Claims Pass-On Rights

LVT Number: #25487

Landlord sued to evict apartment occupants after rent-stabilized tenant died. Landlord and the occupants, including tenant's daughter, signed a settlement agreement in court in February 2013. They agreed to move out by Feb. 28, 2014, and to pay monthly use and occupancy in the meantime. In March 2014, tenant's son, who hadn't previously appeared in court, asked the court to delay eviction because he claimed succession. The son had been in prison between October 2006 and May 2013, and claimed that he had then moved back into the apartment.

Landlord sued to evict apartment occupants after rent-stabilized tenant died. Landlord and the occupants, including tenant's daughter, signed a settlement agreement in court in February 2013. They agreed to move out by Feb. 28, 2014, and to pay monthly use and occupancy in the meantime. In March 2014, tenant's son, who hadn't previously appeared in court, asked the court to delay eviction because he claimed succession. The son had been in prison between October 2006 and May 2013, and claimed that he had then moved back into the apartment. The son asked the court for permission to submit an answer in opposition to the eviction petition. Landlord claimed that the son waited too long to claim any rights and that none of the other occupants had mentioned the son at any time.

The court ruled for the son. He claimed that he had lived in the apartment with tenant before he went to prison and returned there when released. His six-year absence based on incarceration didn't count against him for purposes of claiming that he had primarily resided in the apartment with tenant before she died. The other occupants didn't represent the son and so weren't obliged to represent his interests in court. And while tenant didn't name the son as an apartment occupant in Section 8 records, the son was entitled to due process and to raise his claim at this time. Since the eviction warrant didn't name the son, it could be enforced only against the other occupants but not the son. Landlord could start a new licensee holdover against the son, who could raise his succession claim in that proceeding.

G&L Holding Corp. v. Gonzalez: 43 Misc.3d 1206(A), 2014 NY Slip Op 50506(U) (Civ. Ct. NY; 4/1/14; Wendt, J)