Case Type
Holdover-Owner's Use
Housing Type
SRO, Rent Stabilized
Court
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT
County
Kings County (Brooklyn)
L&T / Index / Case / Docket / Clerk's Number
L&T 304052/20
Slip Opinion Number
2023-872 K C
Petitioner
Consulting SS, Inc.
Respondent
Vincent Gorham, John Doe and/or Jane Doe
Judge
CHEREÉ A. BUGGS, J.P., WAVNY TOUSSAINT, MARINA CORA MUNDY, JJ.
Decision/Order Date
2024-09-27
Posture
Post-answer Motion by Tenant
Disposition
Motion Granted for Tenant
Winner
Tenant Substantially Won
Synopsis
AT2 consolidated three appeals by the same landlord, who sought to evict tenants from a basement apartment and two SRO units, claiming the building was a two-family dwelling and not rent-stabilized. Each tenant argued the building had seven residential units—one apartment and six SROs—making it subject to rent stabilization. The lower court agreed with the tenants, granting summary judgment due to the landlord's failure to serve required statutory termination notices. The Appellate Term affirmed, ruling that the building’s rent stabilization status depends on the units’ function as residences, regardless of their legality under a certificate of occupancy.
Recommended Citation
"CONSULTING SS, INC. v. GORHAM" (2024). All Decisions. 1640.
https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/housing_court_all/1640
