HUGHES v. LENOX HILL HOSP

Inasmuch as the rent stabilization laws were enacted to "`prevent exactions of unjust, unreasonable and oppressive rents and rental agreements and to forestall profiteering, speculation and other disruptive practices,'" ( Matter of Avon Furniture Leasing, Inc. v. Popolizio, 116 A.D.2d 280, 283 [quoting New York City Administrative Code § YY51-1.0], lv denied 68 N.Y.2d 610), plaintiff was properly required to disgorge the profits he garnered from his purported sublease of the subject rent stabilized apartment during the period of his illegal holdover. Accordingly, defendant was properly awarded use and occupancy in the amount charged by defendant for the apartment pursuant to the rent stabilization laws plus any additional amounts received by plaintiff from the illegal subtenant. Also proper was the award of attorneys' fees to defendant in the stipulated amount of $60,000. Plaintiff, however, who succeeded to Bettina Black's leasehold interest in the apartment solely in his capacity as executor of her estate, is liable only in that representative capacity.

We have reviewed plaintiff's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.