§Why CasetextPricing

In the Matter of Brookford, LLC, Appellant,v.New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, et al., Respondents.

Brief

7 Cited authorities

  1. Mahoney-Buntzman v. Buntzman

    2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 3629 (N.Y. 2009)   Cited 246 times   3 Legal Analyses
    In Mahoney-Buntzman, a divorce case, the husband had claimed $1.8 million as "business income" on his federal income tax returns, then claimed during the divorce that those same proceeds should be characterized as from the sale of stock he owned in a prior marriage, in order to shield that money from distribution in the divorce.

  2. Ansonia Assocs. Ltd. P'ship v. Unwin

    130 A.D.3d 453 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)   Cited 30 times
    In Ansonia Associates Ltd. Partnership v. Unwin, 130 AD3d 453, 13 NYS3d 67 [1st Dept., 2015] the court held an apartment claimed to be the residence of a tenant could not be such residence since the tenant asserted on her income tax statements that such apartment was not her residence.

  3. Matter of Nestor v. New York State D.H.C.R

    257 A.D.2d 395 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)   Cited 43 times

    January 7, 1999. Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Colleen McMahon, J.). Supreme Court properly dismissed the petition seeking to annul DHCR's denial of petitioners' application for high income rent deregulation. The Rent Regulation Reform Act of 1993 (L 1993, ch 253) and the Rent Stabilization Law (Administrative Code of City of N.Y. § 26-501 et seq.) prohibit disclosure of any income other than the Federal adjusted gross income of an occupant of an apartment, as reported on the New

  4. Classic Realty LLC v. New York State Division of Housing

    2 N.Y.3d 142 (N.Y. 2004)   Cited 32 times

    No. 32. Argued February 12, 2004. Decided March 30, 2004. APPEAL from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, entered August 7, 2003. The Appellate Division, with two Justices dissenting, affirmed a judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen Bransten, J.), entered in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, which had denied the petition to annul respondent's determination denying petitioner's application for a high-income deregulation

  5. Brookford, LLC v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal

    142 A.D.3d 433 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)   Cited 4 times

    08-04-2016 In re BROOKFORD, LLC, Petitioner–Appellant, v. NEW YORK STATE DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL, et al., Respondents–Respondents. Community Housing Improvement Program (“Chip”)and the Rent Stabilization Association of N.Y.C., Inc., Amici Curiae. Rosenberg & Estis, P.C., New York (Jeffrey Turkel of counsel), for appellant. Adam H. Schuman, New York (Sandra A. Joseph of counsel), for New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, respondent. Sokolski & Zekaria, P.C., New

  6. Classic Realty LLC v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal

    309 A.D.2d 205 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)   Cited 2 times

    1731 August 7, 2003. Petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen Bransten, J.), entered May 30, 2001, which dismissed its application to annul respondent's determination denying its application for a high income deregulation order. Jeffrey R. Metz, of counsel (Borah, Goldstein, Altschuler, Schwartz Nahins, P.C., attorneys) for petitioner-appellant, Roderick J. Walters, of counsel (Carl Eckstein, on the brief, Marcia P. Hirsch, attorney) for respondent-respondent

  7. Section 6013 - Joint returns of income tax by husband and wife

    26 U.S.C. § 6013   Cited 849 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Granting married couples the ability to file income taxes jointly