IN RE LONDON TERRACE v. NEW YORK S. DIV., H, N.Y. App. Div., Judgment, Law, casemine.com

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Attorney(S)

Blaine Z. Schwadel, for petitioner-respondent-appellant. Seth A. Miller, for intervenors-appellants-respondents. Seth A. Miller, for petitioner-appellant. Blaine Z. Schwadel, for intervenor-respondent-appellant.

Judges

Peter Tom
Angela M. Mazzarelli
David Friedman

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Please sign up to generate summary.

IN RE APPLICATION OF LONDON TERRACE ASSOCIATES, L.P., PETITIONER-RESPONDENT-APPELLANT, FOR A JUDGMENT, ETC., v. NEW YORK STATE DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT, MARK L. TYLER AND HELENE ZAREMBER, ETC., ET AL., INTERVENORS-APPELLANTS-RESPONDENTS. IN RE APPLICATION OF HELENE ZAREMBER, ETC., PETITIONER-APPELLANT, FOR A JUDGMENT, ETC.,

The record demonstrates that the determination of respondent agency, granting, only in part, the owner's application for a major capital improvement rent increase, was rationally based and, accordingly, may not be disturbed (see, Matter of Ansonia Residents Assn. v. Dept. of Hous. Community Renewal, 75 N.Y.2d 206, 213; Matter of Nestor v. New York State Div. of Hous. and Community Renewal, 257 A.D.2d 395, 396, lv denied 93 N.Y.2d 982). We note that tenant petitioners, on their appeal, raise matters not argued before the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal. Such matters are not properly before this Court (see, 985 Fifth Ave., Inc. v. State Div. of Hous. Community Renewal, 171 A.D.2d 572, 575-576, lv denied 78 N.Y.2d 861).

We have considered the remaining arguments for affirmative relief raised by both the tenants and the owners and find them unavailing.

Motion seeking to strike respondents' briefs denied.

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

IN RE LONDON TERRACE v. NEW YORK S. DIV., H

Comments