Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta Seminole Realty Co. v. Greenbaum 209 A.D.2d 345

← Cases

Seminole Realty Co. v. Greenbaum

209 A.D.2d 345 Court N.Y. App. Div. Decision date 1994-11-22 English

Contents

Majority

p. 345
Seminole Realty Co., as Holder of Unsold Shares of 255 West 84th Street Owners Corp., Apt. 3-D, Respondent, v Susan Greenbaum, Respondent, and Elayne Kesselman, Appellant, et al., Respondents.
[619 NYS2d 5]

—Order of the Appellate Term of the Supreme Court, First Department (Ostrau, J. P., Parness and Miller, JJ.), entered April 7, 1993, which affirmed a judgment of the Civil Court, New York County (James Grayshaw, J.), entered January 3, 1992, after a nonjury trial, awarding possession of the subject apartment to petitioner landlord, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We agree with the trial court and Appellate Term that respondent-appellant’s relationship to the tenant was that of a close friend and roommate not characterized by the requisite "emotional and financial commitment and interdependence”

p. 346
connoting a family relationship (Braschi v Stahl Assocs. Co., 74 NY2d 201 , 211), and that she was therefore not entitled to succession rights to the subject rent stabilized apartment as a nontraditional family member under the standards set forth in Rent Stabilization Code (9 NYCRR) § 2520.6 (o) (2) and § 2523.5 (b) (1). The women never intermingled their finances or jointly owned real or personal property, held themselves out as a family unit, executed documents formalizing legal obligations, jointly celebrated most major holidays or attended important celebrations with each other’s families (see, Ramirez v Lewis, 177 AD2d 296 ). Appellant’s argument that it is a denial of equal protection to exclude adult friends in a sibling-like relationship from the class of persons entitled to succession rights is improperly raised for the first time on this appeal (Matter of Garfield, 14 NY2d 251 , 260), and in any event the relationship here was that of roommates rather than siblings (compare, Colon v Frias, 162 Misc 2d 36 [Civ Ct, Kings County, 1994]). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin, Kupferman and Williams, JJ.

Cases cited