Matthews v. Abrams

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matthews v. Abrams

2 A.D.2d 856, 155 N.Y.S.2d 941, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4196

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

DecidedOctober 15, 1956

StatusPublished

This text of 2 A.D.2d 856 (Matthews 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

Matthews v. Abrams, 2 A.D.2d 856, 155 N.Y.S.2d 941, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4196 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

Respondent, landlord of a 10-apartment building, converted the furnace thereof from coal-burning to oil-burning and at the same time installed one new radiator and two risers in each apartment. Her application for rent increases, based on the installation of the additional radiators and risers, was denied by the local rent office on the ground that the tenants had not consented. That determination was not protested to the State Rent Administrator. Some 11 months later respondent made a second application for increases, which was denied by the local rent office on the ground that the prior determination was binding. On protest, the State Administrator affirmed the determination of the local rent office on the ground of res judicata and on the further ground that the installations involved did not constitute a heating service additional to that included in the maximum rents. The appeal is from an order of the Special Term annulling the determination of the State Rent Administrator and remitting the matter to him for consideration de novo. Order reversed on the law, without costs, and proceeding dismissed. The findings of the State Rent Administrator are supported by the evidence. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Murphy, Ughetta and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.

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

Respondent, landlord of a 10-apartment building, converted the furnace thereof from coal-burning to oil-burning and at the same time installed one new radiator and two risers in each apartment. Her application for rent increases, based on the installation of the additional radiators and risers, was denied by the local rent office on the ground that the tenants had not consented. That determination was not protested to the State Rent Administrator. Some 11 months later respondent made a second application for increases, which was denied by the local rent office on the ground that the prior determination was binding. On protest, the State Administrator affirmed the determination of the local rent office on the ground of res judicata and on the further ground that the installations involved did not constitute a heating service additional to that included in the maximum rents. The appeal is from an order of the Special Term annulling the determination of the State Rent Administrator and remitting the matter to him for consideration de novo. Order reversed on the law, without costs, and proceeding dismissed. The findings of the State Rent Administrator are supported by the evidence. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Murphy, Ughetta and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 A.D.2d 856, 155 N.Y.S.2d 941, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4196, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matthews-v-abrams-nyappdiv-1956.