51 Cited authorities

  1. Roberts v. Tishman Speyer Properties

    2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 7480 (N.Y. 2009)   Cited 295 times
    In Roberts, this Court rejected DHCR's long-standing statutory interpretation and concluded that luxury deregulation was unavailable in any building during receipt of J–51 benefits (13 N.Y.3d at 285–287, 890 N.Y.S.2d 388, 918 N.E.2d 900).
  2. Grimm v. State

    2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 7379 (N.Y. 2010)   Cited 183 times
    In Matter of Grimm v State of N.Y. Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal Off of Rent Admin. (15 NY3d 358, [2010]), the Court of Appeals specifically stated that "[g]enerally, an increase in the rent alone will not be sufficient to establish a 'colorable claim of fraud,' and a mere allegation of fraud alone, without more, will not be sufficient to require DHCR to inquire further."
  3. People v. Hobson

    39 N.Y.2d 479 (N.Y. 1976)   Cited 441 times
    Finding constitutional prohibition against use of statements taken without notice to defense counsel, buttressing suppression and reversal with discussion of DR 7-104 violation
  4. Thornton v. Baron

    5 N.Y.3d 175 (N.Y. 2005)   Cited 171 times
    In Thornton, the owner engaged in an egregious, fraudulent scheme to remove apartments from stabilization by conspiring with tenants, who shared in the illegal profits, by falsely agreeing the apartment was not being used as a primary residence (and utilizing the courts as a tool to obtain false declarations to that effect) to rent at market rates and then sublease at even higher rates (5 N.Y.3d at 178–179, 800 N.Y.S.2d 118, 833 N.E.2d 261).
  5. Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC

    2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 1553 (N.Y. 2015)   Cited 130 times
    Making no mention of "decisiveness" formulation
  6. Borden ex rel. Others Similarly Situated v. 400 E. 55th St. Assocs., L.P.

    2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 8211 (N.Y. 2014)   Cited 94 times
    Finding it "premature to dismiss class action allegations before an answer is served or pre-certification discovery has been taken"
  7. Columbus Apts., Inc. v. New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal

    5 N.Y.3d 303 (N.Y. 2005)   Cited 85 times

    96. Argued May 4, 2005. Decided June 14, 2005. APPEAL, by permission of the Court of Appeals, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, entered February 26, 2004. The Appellate Division (1) reversed, on the law, a judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J.), which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, had denied the petition to review a determination of respondent New York State Division of Housing and Community

  8. Altschuler v. Jobman 478/480, LLC.

    135 A.D.3d 439 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)   Cited 46 times
    Finding indicia of fraud where landlord failed to provide evidence of alleged improvements to tenant's apartment sufficient to justify an increase in rent
  9. Dixon v. 105 W. 75th St. LLC

    148 A.D.3d 623 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)   Cited 44 times

    159846/14 2764 2763 03-30-2017 Benjamin Dixon, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. 105 West 75th Street LLC, et al., Defendants-Respondents. Moira C. Brennan, New York, for appellant. Kucker & Bruh, LLP, New York (Robert H. Berman of counsel), for respondents. Acosta, J.P., Mazzarelli, Manzanet-Daniels, Webber, Gesmer, JJ. Moira C. Brennan, New York, for appellant. Kucker & Bruh, LLP, New York (Robert H. Berman of counsel), for respondents. Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Manuel J. Mendez, J.), entered

  10. 72A Realty Assocs. v. Lucas

    101 A.D.3d 401 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)   Cited 51 times
    In Lucas, the Appellate Division held that the four-year lookback rule should not be applied, even though the court did not find a colorable claim of fraud, in part because the rent charged four years prior to the complaint was a free market rent following improper deregulation.
  11. Section 2520.11 - Applicability

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 9 § 2520.11   Cited 102 times
    Providing that cooperatives are exempt from regulation under the RSL “so long as they maintain [cooperative] status”
  12. Section 2528.4 - Penalty for failure to register

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 9 § 2528.4   Cited 16 times

    (a) The failure to properly and timely comply, on or after the base date, with the rent registration requirements of this Part shall, until such time as such registration is completed, bar an owner from applying for or collecting any rent in excess of: the base date rent, plus any lawful adjustments allowable prior to the failure to register. Such a bar includes but is not limited to rent adjustments pursuant to section 2522.8 of this Title. The late filing of a registration shall result in the elimination

  13. Section 2506.1 - Determination of legal regulated rents; penalties; fines; assessment of costs; attorney's fees; rent credits

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 9 § 2506.1   Cited 14 times

    (a) (1) Any owner who is found by the division, after a reasonable opportunity to be heard, to have collected any rent or other consideration in excess of the legal regulated rent shall be ordered to pay to the tenant a penalty equal to three times the amount of such excess, except as provided in subdivision (f) of this section. In no event shall such treble damage penalty be assessed against an owner based solely upon the owner's failure to file any timely or proper rent registration statement.