Boulevard Gardens Housing Corp. v. Boulevard Gardens Tenant's Action Committee, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Boulevard Gardens Housing Corp. v. Boulevard Gardens Tenant's Action Committee, Inc.

53 A.D.2d 891, 385 N.Y.S.2d 379, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13726

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

DecidedJuly 12, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 53 A.D.2d 891 (Boulevard Gardens Housing Corp. v. Boulevard Gardens Tenant's Action Committee, Inc.) 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

Boulevard Gardens Housing Corp. v. Boulevard Gardens Tenant's Action Committee, Inc., 53 A.D.2d 891, 385 N.Y.S.2d 379, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13726 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal pursuant to subdivision (b) of section 87 of the Private Housing Finance Law from an order of the Commissioner of Housing and Community Renewal, dated October 23, 1975, which, after a hearing, granted petitioner’s application for an increase in maximum average monthly room rentals. Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. There was substantial evidence in the record upon which the commissioner could reasonably have found that the petitioner met the statutory provision which requires the housing company to prove that there were no reasonable economies possible which could generate additional revenue (see Private Housing Finance Law, §87). The commissioner was correct in determining that the only viable solution is the imposition of the requested rent increase (see Matter of Boulevard Gardens Housing Corp. [Anglum], 35 AD2d 1084). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Cohalan, Rabin and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal pursuant to subdivision (b) of section 87 of the Private Housing Finance Law from an order of the Commissioner of Housing and Community Renewal, dated October 23, 1975, which, after a hearing, granted petitioner’s application for an increase in maximum average monthly room rentals. Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. There was substantial evidence in the record upon which the commissioner could reasonably have found that the petitioner met the statutory provision which requires the housing company to prove that there were no reasonable economies possible which could generate additional revenue (see Private Housing Finance Law, §87). The commissioner was correct in determining that the only viable solution is the imposition of the requested rent increase (see Matter of Boulevard Gardens Housing Corp. [Anglum], 35 AD2d 1084). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Cohalan, Rabin and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

53 A.D.2d 891, 385 N.Y.S.2d 379, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13726, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boulevard-gardens-housing-corp-v-boulevard-gardens-tenants-action-nyappdiv-1976.