In the matter of Georgetown Leasing, LLC: Adm. Rev. Dckt. No. CO-210001-RP, issued July 1, 2014, James R. Marino of Kucker Marino Winiarsky & Bittens, LLP successfully defeated an occupant’s claim of succession by convincing the DHCR to apply logic announced by the Appellate Division, 1st Dept. in Third Avenue Lenox Terrace Associates v. Edwards, 91 AD 3d 352, 937 NUS 2d 41 (1st Dept., 2012). During the DHCR proceeding, it was determined that the tenant of record, who had never advised the Owner that she had vacated, moved out of the subject apartment over 3 years after the owner discovered that she had vacated. The DHCR’s Administrator, in the same order, then directed that the complainant ( a family member of the tenant of record) be issued a lease renewal in her name, notwithstanding the fact that the claim for succession to the tenancy came over three (3) years after the tenant of record vacated, and notwithstanding the continued remittance of rent by the tenant of record for over three (3) years after the tenant of record vacated, and notwithstanding the execution of a lease renewal by the tenant of record years after the tenant of record vacated. In an appeal against the Administrator’s order, Mr. Marino was able to demonstrate to the DHCR that the established appellate case law of the Edwards decision, which holds that succession cannot occur years after a tenant vacates, but still remits rent and still executes lease renewals, must apply to the facts in Georgetown Leasing, and the DHCR held in its appeals decision that the complainant has no rights as a successor tenant.