People Ex Rel. Office of Rent Administration v. Berry Estates, Inc.

444 N.E.2d 1324, 58 N.Y.2d 701, 458 N.Y.S.2d 905, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3918
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedDecember 2, 1982
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 444 N.E.2d 1324 (People Ex Rel. Office of Rent Administration v. Berry Estates, Inc.) 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
People Ex Rel. Office of Rent Administration v. Berry Estates, Inc., 444 N.E.2d 1324, 58 N.Y.2d 701, 458 N.Y.S.2d 905, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3918 (N.Y. 1982).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed with costs.

Insofar as appellants seek relief under subdivision (a) of section 9 of the Emergency Tenant Protection Act of 1974 (L 1974, ch 576, §4), their claim is precluded by their failure to file an application for rent adjustment within 60 days of the local effective date of Resolution No. 4, whether that date be January 1,1979 or June 1,1979 (as calculated from this court’s dismissal of the motion for leave to appeal in the Mack case [People ex rel. Office of Rent Admin., Div. of Housing & Community Renewal v Mack, 88 Misc 2d 1047, affd 65 AD2d 681, mot for lv to app den 47 NY2d 706, 800]). To the extent that appellants seek “unusual remedies” predicated on our decision in Mayer v City Rent Agency (46 NY2d 139), the courts below found that the requisite “calculated action” on the part of the municipality designed to frustrate appellants’ rights was not present in this instance. This affirmed finding cannot be overturned on appeal to this court. Nor does this case fall within the scope of Matter of Our Lady of Good Counsel R. C. Church & School v Ball (38 NY2d 780, affg 45 AD2d 66, 73). Finally, we agree with the Appellate Division that *704 section 9 of the Emergency Tenant Protection Act comports with constitutional principles of equal protection and due process.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

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

Related

Matter of PJB Equities, Inc. v. Village of Ossining
2024 NY Slip Op 02200 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2024)
Gboizo v. State of New York Division of Housing & Community Renewal
13 Misc. 3d 714 (New York Supreme Court, 2006)
P & N Tiffany Properties, Inc. v. Village of Tuckahoe
33 A.D.3d 61 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Pokoik v. Department of Health Services of County of Suffolk
220 A.D.2d 13 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
Fallon v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal
154 Misc. 2d 340 (New York Supreme Court, 1992)
Opn. No.
New York Attorney General Reports, 1991
Berry Estates, Inc. v. New York
812 F.2d 67 (Second Circuit, 1987)
Willoughby Nursing Home v. Axelrod
113 A.D.2d 617 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1986)
Wendell Terrace Apts. v. Scruggs-Leftwich
588 F. Supp. 839 (E.D. New York, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
444 N.E.2d 1324, 58 N.Y.2d 701, 458 N.Y.S.2d 905, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3918, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-office-of-rent-administration-v-berry-estates-inc-ny-1982.