AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)

In the Matter of HOWARD-CAROL TENANTS' ASSOCIATION et al., Appellants, v. NEW YORK CITY CONCILIATION AND APPEALS BOARD, Respondent.

MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

Both Special Term and the majority at the Appellate Division concluded that the determination of the Conciliation and Appeals Board, that there had been no diminution in required maintenance services, was supported by substantial evidence and was neither arbitrary nor capricious. We cannot say that this was erroneous as a matter of law. That the board found an absence of "objective criteria", thus making it "impossible to determine the comparison between the May 31, 1968 and present day levels of facilities, equipment, maintenance and all of the other items comprising services", and accordingly applied "uniform standards for determining such issues", bespeaks the failure of proof on the part of the petitioning tenants rather than disclosing a legal infirmity in the determination reached by the board.

Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and MEYER concur in memorandum.

Order affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MATTER OF HOWARD-CAROL TENANTS' v. N.Y. CITY CONC
(Nov 13, 1979)