Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Ccm Company, L.P v. Thomas Tselentakis

June 27, 2011

CCM COMPANY, L.P., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
THOMAS TSELENTAKIS,
DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.



On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Special Civil Part, Bergen County, Docket No. LT-92-10.

Per curiam.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Argued May 24, 2011

Before Judges Payne and Baxter.

Plaintiff CCM Company, the owner of a 225-unit HUD-subsidized apartment building housing qualified individuals who are disabled or over the age of sixty-two, appeals an order vacating a judgment of possession entered in CCM's favor and against its tenant, defendant Thomas Tselentakis, upon evidence that Tselentakis had assaulted Salvatore Escobar, a member of CCM's custodial staff, causing physical injury. On appeal, CCM makes the following arguments:

POINT I

THE TRIAL COURT DENIED THE LANDLORD ITS RIGHT TO IMMEDIATE RECOVERY OF POSSESSION OF THE PREMISES BASED ON THE TENANT'S ASSAULT OF THE LANDLORD'S EMPLOYEE, AN INCURABLE GROUND OF EVICTION.

A. Under the Plain Language of the Anti-Eviction Act, The Tenant's Single Assault of Mr. Escobar Called For the Landlord's Expeditious Recovery of the Premises Through the Summary Dispossess Procedure.

B. The Tenant's Assault of Mr. Escobar Constituted an Incurable Basis of Eviction.

POINT II

THE TRIAL COURT GRANTED THE TENANT A HARDSHIP STAY WITHOUT ANY LEGAL BASIS AND IMPROPERLY CREATED A PROBATIONARY PERIOD FOR THE TENANT TO CURE HIS CONDUCT.

POINT III

THE CONSENT JUDGMENT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ENFORCED PURSUANT TO NEW JERSEY LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY.

POINT IV

RULE 4:50-1 PROVIDED ABSOLUTELY NO BASIS FOR VACATING THE JUDGMENT OF POSSESSION.

A. The Arguments Asserted by the Tenant Afford the Tenant No Protection Under Rule 4:50-1.

1. The Tenant's Occupancy in Subsidized Housing Constitutes No Basis for ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.