Cacioppo v. Weaver

New York Supreme Court

Cacioppo v. Weaver

6 Misc. 2d 767, 167 N.Y.S.2d 961, 1957 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3052

DecidedMay 8, 1957

StatusPublished

This text of 6 Misc. 2d 767 (Cacioppo v. Weaver) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cacioppo v. Weaver, 6 Misc. 2d 767, 167 N.Y.S.2d 961, 1957 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3052 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

Louis L. Freedman, J.

Proceeding to review the determination of respondent, denying decontrol of the premises.

On complaint of a tenant of a rent overcharge, the landlord was notified thereof. An answer was filed wherein it was claimed that the premises were a two-family house, and the tenant’s apartment having become vacant subsequent to April 1, 1953, the accommodations were decontrolled; that although a third apartment in the premises had been rented, upon being advised of its illegal occupancy, the landlord caused same to be vacated. The local rent administrator fixed the maximum rent for the tenant’s apartment and the landlord filed a protest, again claiming the apartment was decontrolled. The protest was denied. It has been held that where a two-family -house is used for occupancy by three families, for the purpose of administering the Rent Control Law it may not be considered as a two-family dwelling (Matter of Levy v. McGoldrick, 279 App. Div. 940; Jaffe v. McGoldrick, 116 N. Y. S. 2d 901; Sobel v. McGoldrick, N. Y. L. J., Dec. 17, 1954, p. 9, col. 5; Toombs v. Abrams, N. Y. L. J., March 17, 1955, p. 11, col. 2).

The determination is in accordance with law, and the petition is dismissed.

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

Louis L. Freedman, J.

Proceeding to review the determination of respondent, denying decontrol of the premises.

On complaint of a tenant of a rent overcharge, the landlord was notified thereof. An answer was filed wherein it was claimed that the premises were a two-family house, and the tenant’s apartment having become vacant subsequent to April 1, 1953, the accommodations were decontrolled; that although a third apartment in the premises had been rented, upon being advised of its illegal occupancy, the landlord caused same to be vacated. The local rent administrator fixed the maximum rent for the tenant’s apartment and the landlord filed a protest, again claiming the apartment was decontrolled. The protest was denied. It has been held that where a two-family -house is used for occupancy by three families, for the purpose of administering the Rent Control Law it may not be considered as a two-family dwelling (Matter of Levy v. McGoldrick, 279 App. Div. 940; Jaffe v. McGoldrick, 116 N. Y. S. 2d 901; Sobel v. McGoldrick, N. Y. L. J., Dec. 17, 1954, p. 9, col. 5; Toombs v. Abrams, N. Y. L. J., March 17, 1955, p. 11, col. 2).

The determination is in accordance with law, and the petition is dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 Misc. 2d 767, 167 N.Y.S.2d 961, 1957 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3052, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cacioppo-v-weaver-nysupct-1957.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack