Invoice or legal notice from New York Law Journal, Aug

non or juagmenrpcnaiug ucici uiiiiauuis Contracts §510). - - - of appeal is granted. The evidence adduced at trial estab­ ties, beyond the mere acceptance of rent ’ tical reach of contract claims, the first nViSOll V. ----- ---------- Tenenbaum v. Padilla (39014/03)— z PEOPLE, res,, v. DOREEN BRADY, ap lished that plaintiff’s president and appel­ (see e.g. Dice v. Inwood Hills Condomini­ um, 237 AD2d 403 [1997]). the evidence cause of action is dismissed as duplica­ tive. Granted Short Form Order Petretic v. Axelrod (39012/03)— Motion Granted z — Motion by defendant-appellant for an lant had a long-standing business and Restored in Regular Order Tenenbaum v. Padilla (39014/03)— . o extension of time to take an appeal is personal relationship with each other adduced at trial, including providing the lease to tenants with the no-pets clause The monetary jurisdictional limit of the District Court is $15,000, exclusive of Santana v. Barker (8476/03)—Grant Motion Withdrawn Welcome v. Genevieve Reilly o i granted on condition the appeal is taken during which a considerable amount of Ext Short Form Order highlighted, telephone calls to tenants interest and cost (UDCA 201, 202; cf. within 30 days of the order hereon. work was performed by plaintiff on and discussions with them, numerous DDCA 208 [b]). It appears that the causes Santiago v. Bankers Trust Co. (48579/03)~Molion Withdrawn co behalf of appellant. No written contract (6118/02)—Granted Short Form Order Justice Yvosine Lewis PEOPLE, res., v. TIFFANY AUEN, ap — mailings of notices regarding the dog, the of action set forth in the complaint were o Motion by defendant-appellant for poor was ever entered into and the work was billed on a time and material basis. Fur­ commencement of two prior summary intended as alternative theories of recov­ Scott V, Mauro (37360/01)—Grant Ext Beaumont v. James (4134/04)— I person relief and assignment of counsel proceedings (dismissed on technical ery on which plaintiffs could only recov­ Short Form Order Motion Withdrawn ■0 o is denied. ther, the record contained credible evi­ grounds), and landlord’s attempt (held er the maximum of $15,000 (see Siegel, Woodson v. NYC NYCH&HC Corp Brown V. Governele (19261/03)— c o Defendant was convicted of a violation dence that appellant caused plaintiff to barred by the ETPA in a prior administra­ Practice Commentaries, McKinney’s (27683/02)—Restored in Regular Order CT o and is not subject to incarceration (cf. be chosen to do the work, that he tive proceeding) to refuse to renew the Cons Laws of NY, Book 29A, CCA 211 at Motion Denied Justice Betsy Barros Charnyy v. Wing (7353/02)—Motion People v. Farinaro, 36 NY2d 283). showed plaintiff the job site, provided lease, supports the court’s conclusion §9, UDCA 211 at 477). Accordingly, the Granted o' plaintiff with the architectural plans and Barrios v. Barrios (6130/04)—Motion CD following trial that landlord did not waive complaint does not seek to recover an Coppola v. Saadeddin (32687/03)— "0 PEOPLE, res., v. CHARLES W. CHANG, gave plaintiff a $5,000 cash payment Granted O ap — Motion by defendant-appellant shortly after work began. In addition, the no-pets clause in the lease at issue. amount in excess of the court’s monetary Barrios v. Barries (6130/04)—Motion Motion Granted o The court properly found that tenant jurisdictional limit. Davlatov v. Grunwald (15682/02)— O seeking to stay execution of the judg­ appellant spent a couple of hours at the Denied job site almost every day and he Olivo failed to establish that he was enti­ Since it is uncontrovered that plaintiffs Marked Off 9L ment of conviction pending determina­ did not enter into a contract with Reality Barrios v. Barrios (6130/04)—Motion approved work which was beyond the tled to keep a dog for therapeutic rea­ Fergeson v. I.H.B, Rlty., Inc. tion of the appeal is granted on condi­ sons as a reasonable accommodation Roofing of Mineola, inc., that part of the Granted O tion that the appeal is perfected by scope of the architectural plans. Thus, (15570/95)—Restored in Regular Order pursuant fo the Fair Housing Act (42 USC motion seeking dismissal of the com­ Joe v. .loe (12999/04)—Motion Grant­ Friedman v. Nichols (23888/02)— o October 1, 2004: otherwise stay vacated. the record contains legally sufficient evi­ §3601 et seq.), as he failed to introduce plaint as to this defendant is granted. ed o BARILE, ap., v. CARTWRIGHT TENTS dence to support a finding that appellant sufficient evidence to establish his handi­ Defendant Reality Roofing Inc.’s remain­ Justice Bert Banyun Motion Granted c entered into an implied contract with Gallina v. Barone Properties, Inc. 3 & PARTY RENTALS, JNC., res — Appeal cap and the necessity of keeping a dog to ing contentions lack merit. plaintiff (see Cohen v. Hallmark Cards, 45 Lazebnikova v. Yuan (10761/02)— (12744/04)—Motion Withdrawn CD by landlord from (1) a final judgment of NY2d 493,499 [ 1978]; Jemzura, 36 NY2d use and enjoy the apeirtment (see Doc v. Case Disposed Gambrell V. Gyan (30867/03)—Motion 3 the Justice Court, Town of Carmel, at 503-504; Matter of Argersinger, 168 New York Univ., 666 F2d 761 [2d Cir Putnam County (J. Spofford, J.), entered 1981]; Crossroads Apts. Assocs. v, LeBoo, Lazebnikova V. Yuan (10761/02)— Granted AD2d at 758). Moreover, inasmuch as a Granted Short Form Order Gonzalez v. Fiallo (16892/03)—Marked on January 16, 2003, which dismissed 152 Mlsc 2d 830 [Rochester City Ct 1991]; the petition and awarded tenant the principal sum of $39,339.95 on its coun­ fair interpretation of the evidence sup­ ports the court’s determination that Ocean Gate Assoc. Starrett Systems V. Dopico, 109 Mlsc 2d 774 [Civ Ct, Kings KINGS Justice Nicholas Coffinas Off Hardwick Elevator Corp v. Boyard terclaim, (2) an amended final judgment of said court, entered on May 2, 2003, there was an implied contract, the court’s determination that plaintiff was entitled to a judgment against appellant County 1981]). As pertinent hereto, the Fair Housing COUNTY Henry V. Lewis (1103/03)—Motion Granted Mgt. Corp (2628/04)—Marked Off Hightower v. Samantha’s Cab Corp. which reduced the amount of the award Act (42 USC §3602) provides: “(h) ‘Handi­ Justice Neil Jon Rretog (9738/02)—Motion Deemed Moot should not be disturbed (see Vizzari, 1 ssaBB-^saaas------ Holloman V. Holloman (9352/04)— in favor of tenant to the sum of cap’ means, with respect to a person (1) Lester v. Grand Style Trans AD3d at 431; Koslowski, 297AD2d at Marked Off $19,382.50, and (3) an amended final 785). Appellant's remaining contentions a physical or mental impairment which (17028/02)—Joint Trial judgment of said court, entered on July substantially limits one or more of such Horsey v. Tamnat (11337/03)—Marked 14, 2003, which further reduced the lack merit. person’s major life activities, (2) a record SUPREME COURT Justice M. Garson Off Accordingly, the judgment should be Mann v. Lafayette (5847/04)—Case award to tenant to the sum of of having such an impairment, or (3) Goody V, Lloyd (31483/02)—Motion affirmed. Justice Tba Disposed $13,687.50. AVALONBAY COMMUNITIES, INC., res, being regarded as having such an impair­ Granted Appeal from the final judgment entered ment. ...” Lasalle Nat. Bank v. Martin Mina v. Adames (43858/00)—Motion McCall V. Atlantic Paratrans of NYC V. BETTS, ap—Appeal by tenant from a (46714/03)—Motion Granted on January 16, 2003 and the amended A refusal “to make reasonable accom­ (33095/99)—Motion Withdrawn Granted final judgment of the District Court, Suf­ Melnikov v. Dong (38140/02)—Motion final judgment entered on May 2,2003 modations in the rules, policies, prac­ Default Judgement Motion Part folk County (C. Hackeling, J.), entered Justice ira Harkavy Granted unanimously dismissed as superseded June 4, 2003, awarding landlord posses­ tices or services, when such by the amended final judgment entered accommodation may be necessary to Arama v. Consol. Bus Co. Brown v. Florentino (4563/04)— Mondestin v. Williams (23279/02)— sion and the sum of $3,460. (13700/04)—Motion Granted Motiort Withdrawn on July 14, 2003. afford such person equal opportunity to Motion Granted Final judgment unanimously reversed Archer V. Grimes (10509/04)—Motion NY Central Mutual Ins. Co. v. Chandler Final judgment entered on July 14, 2003 use and enjoy a dwelling...” constitutes Toro-Mendez v. Steele (47648/01.)— without costs and petition dismissed. (i 7060/04)—Motion Granted unanimously reversed without Costs, discrimination pursuant to the Fair Hous- Withdrawn Motion Withdrawn Real Property Law §232-c provides that.' ing Act (42 USC §3604 [3]; 24 CFR Ojofeitimi V. Samuels (1153/04)— petition reinstated, final judgment direct­ Arroyo v. Madison Square Garden Justice Laura Lee Jacobson the tenancy created by an acceptance of ed to be entered in favor of landlord 100.204). (40164/03)—Motion Granted Motion Granted rent after the expiration of a lease term Kuzmyak v. O’Neil (22847/02)— awarding it possession and the principal ■‘shall be a tenancy from month-to-month The tenant in LeBoo, cited by tenant Azovv. Morales (20778/03)—Motion Progressive Northeastern v. Forde sum of $5,965, and counterclaim dis­ Olivo, raised an issue of fact as to his Granted Denied Short Form Order (15449/04)—Motion Granted commencing on the first day after the missed. expiration of such term”. Real Property entitlement to accommodation by sub­ Baucicaut v. Anella (29826/03)— Jury Coordinating Part 1 Rayevv. Kestenbaum (26092/01)— In this nonpayment proceeding, the mitting three expert affidavits, from a Motion Granted Motion Granted Law §232-b provides that a month-to- Hannon v. Allen (23750/00)—Motion record establishes that the parties had month tenancy outside the City of New treating psychiatrist, his clinical social Benoit v. Jules (4426/03)—Motion Romero v. Lerman (6253/04)—Motion contemplated the possibility that the worker and a certified pet-assisted thera­ Granted Granted Denied York may be terminated by a landlord Khan v. Chrysler Financial LLC repairs they had agreed to undertake, “by notifying the {tenant] at least one pist, stating that LeBoo’s pet was neces­ Bentley v. Ansar (15430/03)—Motion Shoaib v. Quijano (48465/03)—Motion with landlord paying for labor and tenant sary to his use and enjoyment of the (11299/02)—Motion Granted month before the expiration of the term Withdrawn Granted paying for parts, might not be successful subject premises and demonstrating the Blair v. Bec New Communities Norman v. Nationwide Mutual Ins. Silvetti V. Gulotta (20138/03)—Motion of his election to terminate”. To be effec­ (15520/97)—Motion Granted and that in such event, tenant could ter­ existence of an issue of fact as to his (9706/04)—Motion Withdrawn Granted tive, the termination notice must termi­ minate the lease early thereby relieving “emotional and psychological depend­ Bueno v. Rich (32451/03)—Motion Justice Lawrence Knipei nate the tenancy at the expiration of the Justice Larry D. Martin each other from any further obligations ence on the [pet] which requires him to Granted pursuant thereto. However, rent for the rental month (People ex rel Botsford v. Badillo V. NYCTA (21938/02)—Grant keep the [pet] in the apartment” (LeBoo, Castro v. Rivas (10527/04)—Motion Dragonettl v. Chase Manhattan Auto Darling, 47 NY 666 [1872]; Witherbee, Ext Short Form Order month of March is owed to landlord Sherman & Co. v. Wykes, 159 App Div 24 152 Mlsc 2d at 834). In contrast, tenant Withdrawn Finance (28942/02)—Denied Short Form since tenant did not vacate the premises Olivo submitted only the ambiguous Bristow V. Surgeon (46355/01)— [ 1913]; Ferro v. Lawrence, 195 Mise 2d Collymore v. Rundell (6513/04)— Order until March 31. Moreover, even if there statement of his physician that Motion Denied Granda v. Lehr Const. Corp 529 [2002]: Hunt v. Hart, 188 Mise 534 Motion Withdrawn Callaghan v. NYC (37240/02)—Motion had been a breach of the lease by land­ depressed people may benefit from hav­ Cook V. White (7908/04)—Motion (26940/99)—Denied Short Form Order lord, tenant’s duty to pay March rent was [1947]). Withdrawn In the instant case, it was stipulated ing pets and notes from his medical Granted Granda V. Lehr Const. Corp not suspended since there was no records that he was anxious about possi­ Candelaria v. NYCTA (22791/02)- (26940/99)—Granted Short Form Order that tenant’s lease expired on September Coussa Inf! v. Infl Fine Foods Granted Short Form Order express provision in the lease declaring bly losing his dog. Furthermore, even (4455/04)—Motion Granted Sabbagh v. Nezhnik (45205/98)— 24, 2002. Landlord claims that only a Ciccone v. NYC (41824/02)—Granted the circumstances under which the ten­ assuming arguendo that tenant Olivo’s Denied Short Form Order month-to-month tenancy arose thereafter Daniels v. Interfaith Medical Center Short Form Order ant may withhold rent (Westchester anxiety, depression and physical ail­ and that it terminated the month-to- (47476/03)—Motion Withdrawn ConsoJazio v. NYCTA (14112/02)— Justice Mark L Partaow County Indus. Dev. Agency v. Morris ments as described in the record consti­ month tenancy by serving a notice on Dorfman v. Trump Village Section 3 Motion Denied Indus. Bldrs., 278 AD2d 232 [2000]; 3 tute a “physical or mental impairment Casaiev. NYC (20/97)—Motion Rasch, New York Landlord and Tenant- December 28, 2002 effective January 31. Inc (27812/03)—Motion Withdrawn Consolazio v. NYCTA (14112/02)— 2003. Assuming, as landlord contends, which substantially limits one or more of Granted Summary Proceedings §43:31 at 128 [4th [his] major life activities,” the record is EJie V, Pierre (669/03)--Motior. Grant­ Motion Granted NYC V. Castelli (21257/04)—Motion that only a month-to-month tenancy ed Daceus v. NYC (47849/01)-Grant Ext ed]) and a defense of constructive evic­ arose, the tenancy month ran from the not sufficient to demonstrate that keep­ Granted tion is not available to a tenant who con­ ing a dog would in fact be necessary to Falade v- Hall (5105/04)—Motion With­ Short Form Order Donovan v. NYC (43822/03)—Motion 25th of the month to the 24th of the next drawn Dreuxv. NYC (45801/03)—Restored in tinues to occupy the demised premises month. Inasmuch as landlord’s termina­ his enjoyment of the subject premises Withdrawn (see West Broadway Glass Co. v. l.T.M. (see generally One Overlook Avenue Genao v. Frazier (28756/03)—Motion Regular Order tion notice did not terminate the tenancy Feliciano v. NYC (18285/00)—Motion Bar, 245 AD2d 232 [199?]). In view of the Corp. V N.Y. State Div. of Human Rights, Granted Eadeh v. NYC (1036/01)—Marked Off Withdrawn agreement between the parties to termi­ one month prior to the expiration of a Gonzalez v. Kevin & Richard Hardware tenancy month and did not terminate the. _AD3d_[2dDept,June 1,2004]). Feliciano v. NYC (7850/99)—Marked Guan v. Tucsan Dairy Farms nate the lease, there is no basis to award Corp. (29448/03)—Motion Granted Off (25873/98)—Motion Granted tenancy on its expiration date, the notice; GRIFFIN, res, v. FANTASY LIMOS, ap — Hartford v. Leiya (32675/03)—Motion tenant damages for relocation expenses Appeal by defendant from a small claims Fleck v. NYC (15311/04)—Case Dis­ Guerilus v. NYCTA (18998/00)—Grant­ was defective. Accordingly, the petition Granted and loss of business, As to the portion of judgment of the Justice Court, Town of posed ed Short Form Order must be dismissed. We reach no other Ivanowski v. Mega Builders, Inc. the counterclaim relating to the reim­ Hyde Park, Dutchess County (M. Gong V. Sub Surface Leasing Heiden-Johnson v. NYC (21667/04)— bursement costs incurred to repair the issue. (13609/04)—Motion Withdrawn (37899/02)—Motion Granted