93 RALPH v NYCHA LAW DEPT. [41 Misc 3d 692] 693
Query: civil /2 court /s jurisdiction & section eight 8 /5
subsidy
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Sonya M. Kaloyanides, General Counsel, New York City Hous-
ing Authority, New York City, for defendant. Robert H. Gordon,
New York City, for plaintiff.
OPINION OF THE COURT
KATHERINE A. LEVINE, J.
The decision/order on this motion is as follows:
Plaintiff 93 Ralph, LLC (plaintiff or landlord) brings this
breach of contract action to recover $25,000 from defendant
New York City Housing Authority (defendant or Housing
Authority) for unpaid Section 8 subsidies and consequential
damages. Plaintiff alleges that the Authority improperly
suspended subsidy payments between January-June 2011 due
to its failure to timely notify plaintiff of defects in the property,
as contained in the contract between plaintiff and defendant,
and hence failed to give plaintiff an opportunity to cure said
defects.
Defendant moves to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR
3211 (a) (2) on the grounds that this court lacks subject matter
jurisdiction since the plaintiff should have challenged the Hous-
ing Authority’s failure to give proper notice in a CPLR article
78 proceeding and the Civil Court has no jurisdiction to hear an
article 78 proceeding. Defendant also moves to dismiss pursuant
to CPLR 3211 (a) (5) and (7) on the grounds that any claims
under an article 78 proceeding are time-barred and that plaintiff
fails to state a cause of action.
Facts
Plaintiff owns an apartment building at 93 Ralph Avenue in
Brooklyn, New York. It participates in the federally funded Sec-
tion 8 rent subsidy program of the Housing Act of 1937 (42
USC § 1437f), which aids ‘‘low-income families in obtaining a
decent place to live, by subsidizing private landlords who would