338 West 46th Street Realty, LLC v. State of New York State Division of Housing

101 A.D.3d 439, 957 N.Y.2d 292

Opinion

[440]*440Respondents’ determination had a rational basis, given the pendency of a Civil Court proceeding involving the rent overcharges issue (see Matter of Pell v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 NY2d 222, 231 [1974]). Under all of the relevant circumstances, the doctrine of “primary jurisdiction” (Sohn v Calderon, 78 NY2d 755, 768 [1991]) does not support petitioner’s argument that respondent agency abused its discretion in determining that it was appropriate for the Civil Court to resolve the rent overcharge issue, especially since the agency made the determination, not the court.

We have considered petitioner’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Sweeny, Richter, Román and Clark, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

338 West 46th Street Realty, LLC v. State of New York State Division of Housing, 101 A.D.3d 439, 957 N.Y.2d 292 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

101 A.D.3d 439 (338 West 46th Street Realty, LLC v. State of New York State Division of Housing) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sohn v. Calderon
587 N.E.2d 807 (New York Court of Appeals, 1991)