Cenpark Realty Co. v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cenpark Realty Co. v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal

258 A.D.2d 543, 685 N.Y.S.2d 26

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

DecidedJanuary 28, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 258 A.D.2d 543 (Cenpark Realty Co. v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal) 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

Cenpark Realty Co. v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal, 258 A.D.2d 543, 685 N.Y.S.2d 26 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (William McCooe, J.), entered on or about August 3, 1998, which denied petitioner landlord’s application to annul respondent Division of Housing and Community Renewal’s determination denying petitioner a major capital improvement rent increase for certain pointing, waterproofing, and roof replacement work, and dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Respondent’s finding that the work in question was not done on a building-wide basis and did not inure to the benefit of all tenants, as required by Rent Stabilization Code (9 NYCRR) § 2522.4 (a) (2) (i) (c) in order to qualify as a major capital improvement, has ample support in the record, including tenant complaints of continuing leaks and water damage, the contractor’s statement that it worked on only a portion of the building, and the fact that additional pointing work was subsequently performed (see, Matter of Garden Bay Manor Assocs. v New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 150 AD2d 378). Concur — Williams, J. P., Lerner, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.

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

—Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (William McCooe, J.), entered on or about August 3, 1998, which denied petitioner landlord’s application to annul respondent Division of Housing and Community Renewal’s determination denying petitioner a major capital improvement rent increase for certain pointing, waterproofing, and roof replacement work, and dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Respondent’s finding that the work in question was not done on a building-wide basis and did not inure to the benefit of all tenants, as required by Rent Stabilization Code (9 NYCRR) § 2522.4 (a) (2) (i) (c) in order to qualify as a major capital improvement, has ample support in the record, including tenant complaints of continuing leaks and water damage, the contractor’s statement that it worked on only a portion of the building, and the fact that additional pointing work was subsequently performed (see, Matter of Garden Bay Manor Assocs. v New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 150 AD2d 378). Concur — Williams, J. P., Lerner, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

258 A.D.2d 543, 685 N.Y.S.2d 26, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cenpark-realty-co-v-new-york-state-division-of-housing-community-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack