
    Rachel Tantaro, Appellant, v Common Ground Community Housing Development Fund, Inc., et al., Respondents.
    [48 NYS3d 129]
   Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Arthur F. Engoron, J.), entered July 27, 2015, which, upon reargument, adhered to the prior determination, which granted defendants’ motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

As a visitor to premises leased by the tenant, plaintiff was a mere licensee and was not protected from eviction without legal process under RPAPL 853 or any of the statutes upon which she relies (see P & A Bros. v City of N.Y. Dept. of Parks & Recreation, 184 AD2d 267 [1st Dept 1992]; Paulino v Wright, 210 AD2d 171 [1st Dept 1994], lv dismissed 87 NY2d 918 [1996]). Suarez v Axelrod Fingerhut & Dennis (142 AD3d 819, 820 [1st Dept 2016]), upon which plaintiff relies, is distinguishable, since the “known occupants” who were afforded protection from eviction in that case were listed in the tenant’s required filings as household members; plaintiff, who was required to sign in on the visitor’s log each time she sought access to the tenant’s apartment, was not listed as a member of the tenant’s household.

We have considered plaintiff’s other contentions and find them unavailing.

Concur — Renwick, J.R, Mazzarelli, Moskow-itz, Kapnick and Webber, JJ.  