Tenant's Daughter and Son-in-Law Didn't Prove Continuous Occupancy Since 1972

(Decision submitted by Queens attorney Anthony R. Mordente, who represented the landlord.) Rent-controlled tenant's son-in-law claimed that he'd lived with tenant for more than two years before tenant died and that he was therefore entitled to remain in the apartment as a rent-controlled tenant. The DRA ruled for tenant's son-in-law, and landlord appealed. Landlord claimed that the son-in-law and tenant's daughter hadn't proved they'd lived with tenant for the required amount of time. The DHCR ruled for landlord and sent the case back for further fact-finding. Tenant's son-in-law had showed only that he'd lived in the apartment with tenant and tenant's daughter in 1972 and 1973. Tenant died in 1981. Tenant's daughter and son-in-law must prove that they lived in the apartment continuously since 1972 in order to remain in the apartment as rent-controlled tenants.

Stennett: DHCR Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. JG120005RO (6/12/98) [3-page document]