Lieder v. New York City Housing Authority
Opinion of the Court
Substantial evidence supports respondent’s finding that petitioner did not qualify for remaining family member status because he did not obtain respondent’s written consent to his occupancy (see Matter of King v New York City Hous. Auth., 118 AD3d 636, 636 [1st Dept 2014]). Petitioner did not show that respondent acquiesced to his occupancy and, in any event, petitioner may not invoke estoppel against respondent (id. at 637).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.