Opinion
June 8, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Huff, J.).
Since the By-Laws and Proprietary Lease of defendant contain no specific authority for the imposition of a sublet surcharge, and since defendant failed to follow the proper procedures to effectuate an amendment of the Proprietary Lease authorizing such a sublet surcharge, the IAS Court properly voided the surcharge ab initio and provided for an appropriate remedy whereby all the improperly obtained surcharges will be returned ( see, Zuckerman v. 33072 Owners Corp., 97 A.D.2d 736; Bailey v. 800 Grand Concourse Owners, 199 A.D.2d 1). We also agree with the IAS Court that there is no evidence to support plaintiffs' claims of bad faith, self-dealing, or breach of fiduciary duties on the part of the Board of Directors.
As for attorneys' fees, the court properly awarded such to plaintiffs in light of their successful prosecution of several of their claims and in light of the attorneys' fee provision contained in the Proprietary Lease ( see, Sperling v. 145 E. 15th St. Tenants' Corp., 174 A.D.2d 498). However, since there appears to be no evidence with respect to the attorneys' fees actually incurred by plaintiffs, a hearing is warranted on said issue ( see, Barrios v. Klein, 133 A.D.2d 574, lv dismissed 70 N.Y.2d 1002).
We have considered the parties' other claims and find them meritless.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Rubin, Kupferman and Mazzarelli, JJ.