Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Parkway HDFC, Inc. v. McKee

Civil Court of City of New York, New York County

August 12, 2013

PARKWAY HDFC, INC., Petitioners-Landlords
v.
Yuko McKEE, Respondent-Tenant. No. L & T 52147/2013.

Editorial Note:

This decision has been referenced in a table in the New York Supplement.

Sontag & Hyman, Roslyn Height, for Petitioner.

Steven Banks, Esq, Attorney in Chief, Sheryl Karp, of Counsel, The Legal Aid Society, New York, for Respondent.

SABRINA B. KRAUS, J.

The underlying summary nonpayment proceeding was commenced by PARKWAY HDFC, INC (Petitioner) against YUKO MCKEE (Respondent) the rent-stabilized tenant of record of 110-112 WEST 109TH STREET— APT 4A, NEW YORK, N.Y. 10025 (Subject Premises) based on the allegation that Respondent had failed to pay rent due pursuant to the parties' written lease agreement.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Petitioner issued a five day rent demand dated December 21, 2012, seeking $8,987.71 in arrears for a period covering March 1, 2012 through December 31, 2012 at a monthly rate of $959.01. The petition is dated January 15, 2013. Respondent appeared pro se and filed an answer on February 5, 2013, asserting a general denial. The proceeding was initially returnable on February 13, 2013, and was adjourned to February 20, 2013, for the court to obtain a Japanese Interpreter for Respondent. On February 20, 2013, the parties entered a stipulation adjourning the proceeding to April 9, 2013 for settlement or trial.

On April 2, 2013, Counsel for Respondent filed a notice of appearance, and the court so-ordered a subpoena for Respondent to be served on HPD. On April 9, 2013, Respondent's motion to interpose an amended answer was granted pursuant to the parties' stipulation, and the proceeding was adjourned to May 22, 2013.

On May 22, 2013, Respondent moved for summary judgment and related relief, on the grounds that there is an agreement between Petitioner and HPD, which prevents Petitioner from collecting a monthly rent in excess of thirty percent of her income. The parties adjourned the motion and the proceeding pursuant to a stipulation, which provided Respondent's counsel may move for contempt or seek other means to have HPD appear in court pursuant to the subpoena in order to understand HPD's interpretation of the governing regulatory agreement. On June 19, 2013, the motion was adjourned to July 31, 2013, for the submission of additional motion papers. On July 31, 2013, the court briefly heard argument, and reserved decision on the motion.

RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Respondent lives in the Subject Premises with her sixteen year old daughter. Prior to moving into the Subject Premises, Respondent had been living in a New York City aided shelter for victims of domestic violence. The Department of Homeless Services placed Respondent in the Subject Premises in 2009 through the Work Advantage program.

In August 2009, Respondent and Petitioner executed a one year lease agreement for the Subject Premises (Ex P to moving papers). The agreement is dated July 12, 2009, and runs for a term from November 1, 2009 through October 31, 2010, at a monthly rent of $882 .43. At the same time the lease was executed Petitioner executed a " statement of commitment" to the Work Advantage program (Ex N to moving papers).

The statement of commitment provides in pertinent part:

Under the Work Advantage Program, the city will issue a monthly supplement for a period of one year, directly to me, the landlord, on behalf of the eligible Work Advantage client (" tenant" ). At the end of one year, the City will evaluate the client's needs and eligibility and if deemed appropriate, as determined by the City in its sole ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.