Halprin v. 2 Fifth Avenue Co.

434 N.E.2d 244, 55 N.Y.2d 937, 449 N.Y.S.2d 175, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3123
New York Court of Appeals·Decided February 11, 1982·Published

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order appealed from and order thereby brought up for review should be affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the memorandum at the Appellate Division (75 AD2d 565).

There is no merit to appellant’s claim of unconscionability. Not only did the challenged rider commit appellants to pay no greater increase in rent than that determined by the conciliation and appeals board; it additionally accorded them an escape clause in the event of any such increase.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.

[939] Order appealed from and order brought up for review affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

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

Halprin v. 2 Fifth Avenue Co., 434 N.E.2d 244, 55 N.Y.2d 937, 449 N.Y.S.2d 175, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3123 (N.Y. 1982).

434 N.E.2d 244 (Halprin v. 2 Fifth Avenue Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Halprin v. 2 Fifth Avenue Co.
75 A.D.2d 565 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1980)