Korniczky v. Gabel

37 Misc. 2d 349, 235 N.Y.S.2d 891, 1962 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2377
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 31, 1962
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 37 Misc. 2d 349 (Korniczky v. Gabel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Korniczky v. Gabel, 37 Misc. 2d 349, 235 N.Y.S.2d 891, 1962 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2377 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1962).

Opinion

Vincent A. Lupiano, J.

This is a proceeding under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act instituted by landlord to reverse a determination of the Rent and Rehabilitation Administrator, which denied a decontrol of a controlled apartment.

The issue involved a question of fact whether the entire subject apartment was owner-occupied for a period of one year prior to the date of renting to new tenant. The Rent and Rehabilitation Administrator held it was not owner-occupied for one year. There is a rational basis for the Administrator’s determination that the entire apartment involved herein was not continuously occupied by landlord.

Since it is peculiarly the function of administrative agencies to determine disputed questions of fact, the judicial function is exhausted when there is a rational basis for the conclusion approved by the Administrator (Matter of Mounting & Finishing Co. v. McGoldrich, 294 N. Y. 104). Such determination may not be overturned “ unless they have been made without substantial evidence to support them or are arbitrary and capricious ” (Matter of First Terrace Gardens v. McGoldrich, 1 N Y 2d 1, 3). The court may not substitute its judgment for that of the administrative tribunal (Matter of Kaplan v. McGoldrich, 279 App. Div. 615; Matter of Mounting & Finishing Co. v. McGoldrich, supra).

The petitioners’ argument that the protest was decided after the expiration of the time specified in the statute and regulations is of no moment. The time limitation will be considered directory and not a Statute of Limitations. (See Matter of Fonseca v. Herman, 13 A D 2d 626; Matter of Funaro v. Herman, 13 A D 2d 626.)

Accordingly, the application is denied and the petition is dismissed.

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

Related

140 West 57th Street Corp. v. State Division of Housing & Community Renewal
130 A.D.2d 237 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1987)
Wood v. Metropolitan Hotel Industry Stabilization Ass'n
112 Misc. 2d 601 (New York Supreme Court, 1982)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
37 Misc. 2d 349, 235 N.Y.S.2d 891, 1962 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2377, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/korniczky-v-gabel-nysupct-1962.