Case Name: Lawrence J. Mohr, Respondent, v. Andres Gomez et al., Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1997-04-22
Citations: 173 Misc. 2d 553
Docket Number: 
Parties: Lawrence J. Mohr, Respondent, v Andres Gomez et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 173
Pages: 553–555

Head Matter:
[662 NYS2d 979]
Lawrence J. Mohr, Respondent, v Andres Gomez et al., Appellants.
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
April 22, 1997
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Rubenstein & Cohen, New York City (Keith G. Rubenstein of counsel), for appellants. Penn & Proefriedt, New York City (Maralyn B. Fairberg of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
Per Curiam.
Final judgment entered September 14, 1995 affirmed, with $25 costs.
We affirm Civil Court's grant of the holdover petition for possession of the superintendent's apartment — number 1A — at the building premises. Respondent occupied this apartment, without paying rent, incident to his employment in 1978. His occupancy rights terminated upon the termination of employment (RPAPL 713 [11]; Greater N. Y. Corp. of Seventh-Day Adventists v Harrison, 174 AD2d 361; 1 Rasch, New York Landlord and Tenant — Summary Proceedings § 4:7 [3d ed]). Even assuming that respondent resided in apartment 4A as tenant of record for 18 months prior to the employment, the record does not support a finding that respondent occupied apartment 1A in the dual capacity of an employee as well as a tenant or that he should now be accorded stabilized status. Gottlieb v Adames (NYLJ, Sept. 23, 1994, at 21, col 2 [App Term, 1st Dept]), relied upon by respondent, is distinguishable on its facts. The tenant in that case did not relocate to a superintendent's apartment when employed by the landlord and continued to pay rent for many years.
Neither party produced a lease in respondent's name at trial.