Benson Realty Corp. v. Beame

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Benson Realty Corp. v. Beame

72 A.D.2d 758, 421 N.Y.S.2d 826, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13987

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

DecidedNovember 13, 1979

StatusPublished

This text of 72 A.D.2d 758 (Benson Realty Corp. v. Beame) 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

Benson Realty Corp. v. Beame, 72 A.D.2d 758, 421 N.Y.S.2d 826, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13987 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to declare the New York City Rent Control Law unconstitutional, the parties cross-appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 18, 1978, which, inter alia, denied their respective cross motions for summary judgment. Order modified, on the law, by deleting the fourth and fifth decretal paragraphs thereof and substituting therefor provision's (1) declaring that plaintiffs have failed to submit sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption that the laws in question are constitutional and (2) otherwise dismissing the complaint. As so modified, order affirmed, with one bill of $50 costs and disbursements payable jointly to defendants appearing separately and filing separate briefs. All parties to this matter request that a declaration as to constitutionality be made upon the instant record. In our opinion, plaintiffs have failed to set forth sufficient facts to rebut the presumption of constitutionality. Damiani, J. P., Mangano, Rabin and Gulotta, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to declare the New York City Rent Control Law unconstitutional, the parties cross-appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 18, 1978, which, inter alia, denied their respective cross motions for summary judgment. Order modified, on the law, by deleting the fourth and fifth decretal paragraphs thereof and substituting therefor provision's (1) declaring that plaintiffs have failed to submit sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption that the laws in question are constitutional and (2) otherwise dismissing the complaint. As so modified, order affirmed, with one bill of $50 costs and disbursements payable jointly to defendants appearing separately and filing separate briefs. All parties to this matter request that a declaration as to constitutionality be made upon the instant record. In our opinion, plaintiffs have failed to set forth sufficient facts to rebut the presumption of constitutionality. Damiani, J. P., Mangano, Rabin and Gulotta, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

72 A.D.2d 758, 421 N.Y.S.2d 826, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13987, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/benson-realty-corp-v-beame-nyappdiv-1979.