18 Cited authorities

  1. In re Gilman v. N.Y.S. Div. of Housing

    99 N.Y.2d 144 (N.Y. 2002)   Cited 179 times
    In Gilman, we held that DHCR acted irrationally when it applied an amendment relaxing evidentiary requirements for admission of owner records to permit an owner to reopen the record, nearly a decade after the tenant commenced the proceeding and during the administrative appeal, expressing concern that "the rules were changed in midstream" (99 NY2d at 147, 149-152).
  2. Finger Lakes v. Racing Bd.

    382 N.E.2d 1131 (N.Y. 1978)   Cited 125 times

    Argued September 18, 1978 Decided October 26, 1978 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department, LYMAN H. SMITH, J. John Van Voorhis for appellants in the first and second above-entitled actions. Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney-General (John M. Dailey, Ruth Kessler Toch and William J. Kogan of counsel), for New York State Racing and Wagering Board, respondent in the first above-entitled action and for intervenor-respondent in the second above-entitled action

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

    257 A.D.2d 395 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)   Cited 42 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. Ansonia Assocs. Ltd. P'ship v. Unwin

    130 A.D.3d 453 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)   Cited 19 times
    In Ansonia Associates Ltd. Partnership v. Unwin, 130 AD3d 453, 13 NYS3d 67 [1 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.
  5. 85 Eastern Parkway Corp. v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal

    297 A.D.2d 675 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)   Cited 29 times

    2001-00762, 2001-07400 Argued April 22, 2002. September 18, 2002. In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Deputy Commissioner of the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, dated March 7, 2000, which, inter alia, confirmed a determination of the Rent Administrator, dated February 19, 1998, that the petitioner had charged $51,419.33 in excess rent for the subject rent-stabilized apartment and that the fair market monthly rental value thereof was

  6. Matter of Campagna v. Shaffer

    536 N.E.2d 368 (N.Y. 1989)   Cited 43 times

    Argued January 5, 1989 Decided February 16, 1989 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, Jack Turret, J. Michael T. Wallender, John T. DeGraff, Jr., and Brian J. McCann for appellant. Robert Abrams, Attorney-General (Kathie Ann Whipple, O. Peter Sherwood, Richard G. Liskov and Ellen J. Fried of counsel), for respondent. BELLACOSA, J. Petitioner, a licensed real estate broker, challenges an order of the respondent Secretary of State, dated September

  7. Matter of Frick v. Bahou

    56 N.Y.2d 777 (N.Y. 1982)   Cited 51 times

    Decided May 18, 1982 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Third Judicial Department, LAWRENCE E. KAHN, J. Ralph W. Fusco for appellant. Robert Abrams, Attorney-General ( John Q. Driscoll of counsel), for respondents. On review of submissions pursuant to rule 500.2 (b) of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 N.Y.CRR 500.2 [b]), order reversed, without costs, and judgment of Special Term reinstated. Respondents' grading of the examination was in contravention of the respondent

  8. Matter of Daniel C

    99 A.D.2d 35 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)   Cited 48 times
    In Matter of Daniel C. (99 A.D.2d 35, affd 63 N.Y.2d 927), Justice Gibbons was of the view that in order to withstand a constitutional attack, Domestic Relations Law § 115-b had to be construed to read that the natural parents be informed, in the body of an extrajudicial consent form, that a timely revocation thereof would not necessarily result in the immediate return of the child to them.
  9. Matter of Daniel

    473 N.E.2d 31 (N.Y. 1984)   Cited 42 times

    Argued September 12, 1984 Decided October 30, 1984 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, Lawrence N. Martin, Jr., S. Robert H. Silk for appellant. Robert Goldstein for respondents. Robert Abrams, Attorney-General ( Florence E. Abrams, Peter H. Schiff and Robert Schack of counsel), intervenor-respondent pro se. MEMORANDUM. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs. We do not find it necessary to reach the question whether

  10. Vink v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal

    285 A.D.2d 203 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)   Cited 18 times

    August 23, 2001. Plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, New York County (Nicholas Figueroa, J.), entered August 18, 2000, which granted the motions of defendants to dismiss the complaint for failing to state a cause of action. Robert Chira, of counsel (Robert Chira Associates, attorneys) for plaintiffs-appellants. Katherine E. Timon, of counsel (Marion R. Buchbinder, on the brief, Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General of the State of New York, attorney) for defendant-respondent New York

  11. Section 500.1 - General requirements

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 500.1   Cited 1 times

    (a) All papers shall comply with applicable statutes and rules, particularly the signing requirement of section 130-1.1 -a of this Title. (b) Papers filed. Papers filed means briefs, papers submitted pursuant to sections 500.10 and 500.11 of this Part, motion papers, records and appendices. (c) Method of reproduction. All papers filed may be reproduced by any method that produces a permanent, legible, black image on white paper. Reproduction on both sides of the paper is encouraged. (d) Designation

  12. Section 2211.4 - Procedure where tenant fails to return ICF or landlord disputes certification

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 9 § 2211.4   Cited 1 times

    (a) In the event that the tenant or tenants either fail to return the completed ICF to the landlord on or before the date required by section 2211.2(d) of this Part or the landlord disputes the certification returned by the tenant or tenants, the landlord may, on or before June 30th of such year, file an owner's petition for deregulation (OPD) which petitions the city rent agency to verify, pursuant to section 171-b of the Tax Law, whether the total annual income exceeds $250,000, $175,000, or $200