Matter of Gerena v Donovan

2008 NY Slip Op 04384 [51 AD3d 502]

May 13, 2008

Appellate Division, First Department

As corrected through Wednesday, July 16, 2008

In the Matter of Edward Gerena, Petitioner, v ShaunDonovan, as Commissioner of the New York City Department of Housing Preservation andDevelopment, et al., Respondents.

—[*1]Lenox Hill Neighborhood House, New York City (Kimberly Mosolf of counsel), forpetitioner.

Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York City (Dona B. Morris of counsel), formunicipal respondents.

Gutman, Mintz, Baker & Sonnenfeldt, P.C., New Hyde Park (Gary D. Friedman of counsel),for Frawley Plaza, L.L.C., respondent.

Determination of respondent Department of Housing Preservation and Development, datedFebruary 2, 2007, which, inter alia, denied petitioner's application for an enhanced section 8 rentsubsidy, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied, and the proceeding brought pursuant toCPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County[Nicholas Figueroa, J.], entered July 23, 2007), dismissed, without costs.

Termination of petitioner's subsidy for violation of the Section 8 Housing Choice VoucherProgram regulations due to his failure to notify respondent that his wife was living in the subjectresidence with him and his children was supported by substantial evidence (see 300 GramatanAve. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176 [1978]). We do not find thepenalty imposed was so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one's sense offairness.

We have considered petitioner's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.Concur—Saxe, J.P., Gonzalez, Nardelli and McGuire, JJ.