When a holdover case was filed against him, Jose Fajardo claimed that he was really the building's owner and was advised by a Queens County Housing Court judge that he needed to get an injunction from the Queens County Supreme Court if he didn't want to get evicted.
Fajardo didn't heed the judge's admonition, failed to return to Housing Court on the next scheduled hearing date, and, a default judgment was entered against him.
On appeal, the Appellate Term, Second Department, thought Jose's "constructive ownership" claim should have been heard by the Housing Court.
Because the "clear import" of the judge's instructions was that if Jose didn't get a stay he would lose the case, the AT2 thought that guidance was prejudicial and that the default had to be vacated.
Was that constructive?
To view a copy of the Appellate Term's decision, please use this link: Freire v. Fajardo