We're seeing lots of decisions on succession claims coming down from our appellate courts these days, and the overarching theme appears to be that it isn't easy to win them, particularly if you live somewhere else.*
In Caru, LLC. v. Ramos, the Appellate Term, First Department, concluded that Vivian Ramos could no longer remain in a rent-stabilized apartment she had shared with a now-deceased regulated tenant. While the two "may have had a close, loving relationship, there was no showing ... that they intermingled their finances, formalized legal obligations or jointly owned property ...."
It also didn't help Ms. Ramos's case that she happened to have another rent-stabilized apartment in her name on East 85th Street, primarily resided there, and renewed the lease to that unit after her friend's death. Here's how the AT put it:
Moreover, the undisputed evidence showed that respondent was the tenant of record of a rent stabilized apartment located at East 85th Street at all relevant times and, indeed, renewed the lease to the 85th Street apartment after tenant's death. Significantly, all the documentary evidence presented at trial, including tax returns, driver's license, voter registration, banking and credit card statements, and tenant's health care proxy and will, listed respondent's address at the 85th Street apartment.
For a copy of the Appellate Term's decision in Caru, LLC. v. Ramos, please use the following link: http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2007/2007_50280.htm
*For our other blog posts on the governing elements and standards, please use the following link: http://www.nyrealestatelawblog.com/search/mt-search.cgi?IncludeBlogs=4&search=succession