MATTER OF BOSS v. Caputa

New York Court of Appeals

MATTER OF BOSS v. Caputa

171 N.E.2d 892, 8 N.Y.2d 1127

DecidedNovember 30, 1960

StatusPublished

This text of 171 N.E.2d 892 (MATTER OF BOSS v. Caputa) 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

MATTER OF BOSS v. Caputa, 171 N.E.2d 892, 8 N.Y.2d 1127 (N.Y. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

Order affirmed, with costs to the State Rent Administrator: no opinion.

Concur: Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Dye, Fuld and Foster. Judges Froessbl, Van Voorhis and Burke dissent and vote to reverse in the following memorandum: We find ourselves unable to acquiesce in this inconsistent approach to decontrol, whereby the upper and lower portions of a single building, renovated as part of one over-all scheme, are severed and treated differently for purposes of decontrol. The statute when fairly read in the light of the salutary policy which impelled its enactment dictates that full decontrol should be here granted.

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

Order affirmed, with costs to the State Rent Administrator: no opinion.

Concur: Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Dye, Fuld and Foster. Judges Froessbl, Van Voorhis and Burke dissent and vote to reverse in the following memorandum: We find ourselves unable to acquiesce in this inconsistent approach to decontrol, whereby the upper and lower portions of a single building, renovated as part of one over-all scheme, are severed and treated differently for purposes of decontrol. The statute when fairly read in the light of the salutary policy which impelled its enactment dictates that full decontrol should be here granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

171 N.E.2d 892, 8 N.Y.2d 1127, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-boss-v-caputa-ny-1960.