While both the New York County Civil Court and the Appellate Term, First Department, were of the view that Masako M. hadn't used her rent-stabilized apartment as her primary residence, the Appellate Division, First Department, analyzed the case differently and decided to dismiss the underlying holdover proceeding.
But when the dispute got to our state's highest court, the New York State Court of Appeals concluded that the wrong standard of review had been applied by the AD1 and sent the case back down for redetermination.
Because it was bound by a "fair interpretation of the evidence" standard, the AD1 ultimately found that the record supported the conclusion that Masako actually lived in Vermont, and hadn't used her New York apartment as her primary residence from 2004 to 2006.
Someone got whupped.
To view a copy of the Appellate Division's decision, please use this link: 409-411 Sixth St. LLC v. M.