Feinbart Realty Corp. v. Herman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Feinbart Realty Corp. v. Herman

18 A.D.2d 837, 238 N.Y.S.2d 917, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4528

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

DecidedJanuary 28, 1963

StatusPublished

This text of 18 A.D.2d 837 (Feinbart Realty Corp. v. Herman) 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

Feinbart Realty Corp. v. Herman, 18 A.D.2d 837, 238 N.Y.S.2d 917, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4528 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding by a landlord of residential property, pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Act: (a) to annul a determination of the appellant rent authorities, dated February 23,1962, which cancelled maximum rent increases theretofore ordered by a Local Rent Administrator; and (b) to compel such increases to be reinstated retroactively to that date, the State Rent Administrator appeals from the following two orders of the Supreme Court, Kings County: (1) an order entered April 30, 1962, which denied said appellants’ cross motion to dismiss the petition for patent insufficiency (see 34 Misc 2d 70); and (2) an order entered August 10, 1962, which inter alia granted said petition; annulled said determination; and directed that, effective as of February 23, 1962, said rent increases be reinstated. Orders reversed on the law, without costs; cross motion to dismiss the petition granted; and petition dismissed (Capway Realty Corp. v. Temporary State Housing Rent Comm., 18 A D 2d 687; Matter of Solmar Realty Corp. v. Temporary State Housing Rent Comm., 18 A D 2d 705). No questions of fact were considered. Beldoek, P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Rabin, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding by a landlord of residential property, pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Act: (a) to annul a determination of the appellant rent authorities, dated February 23,1962, which cancelled maximum rent increases theretofore ordered by a Local Rent Administrator; and (b) to compel such increases to be reinstated retroactively to that date, the State Rent Administrator appeals from the following two orders of the Supreme Court, Kings County: (1) an order entered April 30, 1962, which denied said appellants’ cross motion to dismiss the petition for patent insufficiency (see 34 Misc 2d 70); and (2) an order entered August 10, 1962, which inter alia granted said petition; annulled said determination; and directed that, effective as of February 23, 1962, said rent increases be reinstated. Orders reversed on the law, without costs; cross motion to dismiss the petition granted; and petition dismissed (Capway Realty Corp. v. Temporary State Housing Rent Comm., 18 A D 2d 687; Matter of Solmar Realty Corp. v. Temporary State Housing Rent Comm., 18 A D 2d 705). No questions of fact were considered. Beldoek, P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Rabin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 A.D.2d 837, 238 N.Y.S.2d 917, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4528, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/feinbart-realty-corp-v-herman-nyappdiv-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack