Garden Towers Co. v. New York State Division of Housing & Community

New York Court of Appeals

Garden Towers Co. v. New York State Division of Housing & Community

416 N.E.2d 1042, 51 N.Y.2d 968, 435 N.Y.S.2d 707, 1980 N.Y. LEXIS 2806

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 18, 1980

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 416 N.E.2d 1042 (Garden Towers Co. v. New York State Division of Housing & Community) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Garden Towers Co. v. New York State Division of Housing & Community, 416 N.E.2d 1042, 51 N.Y.2d 968, 435 N.Y.S.2d 707, 1980 N.Y. LEXIS 2806 (N.Y. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Determination appealed from and order of the Appellate Division brought up for review affirmed, with costs. Petitioner’s operation was conducted on a cash basis as distinguished from an accrual basis method of accounting. In view of this circumstance the determination of the Division of Housing and Community Renewal, which was based in part upon the inclusion of certain 1975 rental rollback recoveries in petitioner’s 1976 income, may not be said to be arbitrary and capricious, or, indeed, an abuse of discretion.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler and Fuchsberg concur in memorandum; Judge Meyer taking no part.

Determination affirmed, etc.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Determination appealed from and order of the Appellate Division brought up for review affirmed, with costs. Petitioner’s operation was conducted on a cash basis as distinguished from an accrual basis method of accounting. In view of this circumstance the determination of the Division of Housing and Community Renewal, which was based in part upon the inclusion of certain 1975 rental rollback recoveries in petitioner’s 1976 income, may not be said to be arbitrary and capricious, or, indeed, an abuse of discretion.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler and Fuchsberg concur in memorandum; Judge Meyer taking no part.

Determination affirmed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

416 N.E.2d 1042, 51 N.Y.2d 968, 435 N.Y.S.2d 707, 1980 N.Y. LEXIS 2806, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garden-towers-co-v-new-york-state-division-of-housing-community-ny-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack