Hinds v. Abrams

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hinds v. Abrams

6 A.D.2d 826, 175 N.Y.S.2d 804, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5457

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

DecidedJune 23, 1958

StatusPublished

This text of 6 A.D.2d 826 (Hinds v. Abrams) 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

Hinds v. Abrams, 6 A.D.2d 826, 175 N.Y.S.2d 804, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5457 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding to review a determination of the State Rent Administrator which fixed maximum rents for housing accommodations, the appeal is from an order denying the petition and dismissing the proceeding. Appellant contends that inasmuch as the premises were a legal two-family house on and prior to April 1, 1953 and thereafter became vacant, they were decontrolled (State Residential Rent Law, § 2, subd. 2, par. [i]; L. 1946, eh. 274, as amd.; State Rent and Eviction Regulations, § 9, subd. 12). Appellant further contends that when subsequently the premises were converted into a legal “class B” multiple dwelling, the respondent was without authority to establish maximum rents for the housing accommodations. Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. The evidence establishes that on and after April 1, 1953 the premises were in fact occupied by three or more families. In view of that fact the premises upon becoming vacant were not exempted from ivnt control. Present — Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Murphy, Ughetta and Hallinan, JJ.

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

In a proceeding to review a determination of the State Rent Administrator which fixed maximum rents for housing accommodations, the appeal is from an order denying the petition and dismissing the proceeding. Appellant contends that inasmuch as the premises were a legal two-family house on and prior to April 1, 1953 and thereafter became vacant, they were decontrolled (State Residential Rent Law, § 2, subd. 2, par. [i]; L. 1946, eh. 274, as amd.; State Rent and Eviction Regulations, § 9, subd. 12). Appellant further contends that when subsequently the premises were converted into a legal “class B” multiple dwelling, the respondent was without authority to establish maximum rents for the housing accommodations. Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. The evidence establishes that on and after April 1, 1953 the premises were in fact occupied by three or more families. In view of that fact the premises upon becoming vacant were not exempted from ivnt control. Present — Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Murphy, Ughetta and Hallinan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 A.D.2d 826, 175 N.Y.S.2d 804, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5457, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hinds-v-abrams-nyappdiv-1958.