Legal Opinion

Eisenberg v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided December 16, 2008Published

1Opinion of the Court

Given petitioner’s failure to submit any objective proof that he had mailed his answer, it was neither arbitrary and capricious nor contrary to law for DHCR to find him in default (see Matter of Szaro v New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 13 AD3d 93 [2004]). Nonetheless, in view of petitioner’s advanced age and Housing Court’s appointment of a guardian ad litem for him in the related holdover proceeding, the matter should be reopened at the administrative level for the reception of additional evidence bearing on whether good cause exists to excuse petitioner’s failure either to…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Dworman v. New York State Division of Housing & Community RenewalNew York Court of Appeals · 1999
  2. Szaro v. New York State Division of Housing & Community RenewalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API