Asch v. Gabel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Asch v. Gabel

21 A.D.2d 774, 252 N.Y.S.2d 684, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3499

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 18, 1964

StatusPublished

This text of 21 A.D.2d 774 (Asch v. Gabel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Asch v. Gabel, 21 A.D.2d 774, 252 N.Y.S.2d 684, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3499 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously reversed on the law, with costs to appellant, determination of the respondent, City Rent and Rehabilitation Administrator, in the matter of the fixing of the maximum rents for the subject premises, annulled, the Administrator directed to recompute and adjust rent increases on the basis of depreciation allowances of 2% of the valuation of the building, and the matter remanded to the Administrator for such purpose. The Administrator concedes that the decision in this case should accord with the court’s ruling in Matter of Klorfein v. Gabel (21 A D 2d 773). See memorandum decision therein. Concur — Rabin, J. P., McNally, Stevens, Eager and Staley, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously reversed on the law, with costs to appellant, determination of the respondent, City Rent and Rehabilitation Administrator, in the matter of the fixing of the maximum rents for the subject premises, annulled, the Administrator directed to recompute and adjust rent increases on the basis of depreciation allowances of 2% of the valuation of the building, and the matter remanded to the Administrator for such purpose. The Administrator concedes that the decision in this case should accord with the court’s ruling in Matter of Klorfein v. Gabel (21 A D 2d 773). See memorandum decision therein. Concur — Rabin, J. P., McNally, Stevens, Eager and Staley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

21 A.D.2d 774, 252 N.Y.S.2d 684, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3499, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/asch-v-gabel-nyappdiv-1964.