Court Denies Pre-Trial Discovery to Occupant Claiming Succession Rights

Landlord sued to evict apartment occupant after rent-stabilized tenant moved out. The occupant, who said he was tenant's son, claimed succession rights. After conducting pre-trial questioning, landlord asked the court to restore the case to the calendar. In response, the occupant claimed that pre-trial discovery wasn't complete and asked that landlord produce all rent-stabilized apartment leases for the past 20 years along with copies of correspondence between landlord, tenant, and other apartment occupants. The occupant also asked permission to conduct pre-trial questioning of the building super on the grounds that the super might have information relevant to the succession claim. 

The court ruled against the occupant. While claiming succession rights, the occupant had still not filed an answer to the petition or demonstrated ample need to discover information related to his succession claim.  He also didn't attach a sworn statement to his discovery motion. The requested leases wouldn't prove that the occupant lived with tenant in the apartment. And the occupant didn't explain what information the super had that he didn't, or why that information must be obtained before trial. The occupant's demand for all correspondence from 2017 to 2022 also fell outside the relevant two-year time period for the succession claim. The court's decision contains a useful discussion of how discovery rules have evolved in housing court since the "Farkas" test was introduced in 1983.

969 Carroll Assoc., LLC v. Mendes: Index No. LT-307047-22, 2023 NY Slip Op 23132 (Civ. Ct. Kings; 4/28/23; Basu, J)