Howard-Carol Tenants' Ass'n v. New York City Conciliation & Appeals Board
This text of 399 N.E.2d 942 (Howard-Carol Tenants' Ass'n v. New York City Conciliation & Appeals Board) 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.
Opinion
[770]*770OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
Both Special Term and the majority at the Appellate Division concluded that the determination of the Conciliation and Appeals Board, that there had been no diminution in required maintenance services, was supported by substantial evidence and was neither arbitrary nor capricious. We cannot say that this was erroneous as a matter of law. That the board found an absence of "objective criteria”, thus making it "impossible to determine the comparison between the May 31, 1968 and present day levels of facilities, equipment, maintenance and all of the other items comprising services”, and accordingly applied "uniform standards for determining such issues”, bespeaks the failure of proof on the part of the petitioning tenants rather than disclosing a legal infirmity in the determination reached by the board.
Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum.
Order affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
399 N.E.2d 942, 48 N.Y.2d 768, 423 N.Y.S.2d 911, 1979 N.Y. LEXIS 2433, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/howard-carol-tenants-assn-v-new-york-city-conciliation-appeals-board-ny-1979.