Raplee Realty Corp. v. Weaver

New York Supreme Court

Raplee Realty Corp. v. Weaver

17 Misc. 2d 78, 188 N.Y.S.2d 1030, 1958 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2597

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 2, 1958

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 17 Misc. 2d 78 (Raplee Realty Corp. v. Weaver) 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

Raplee Realty Corp. v. Weaver, 17 Misc. 2d 78, 188 N.Y.S.2d 1030, 1958 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2597 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

Henry Epstein, J.

This is a petition to review the determination of the State Rent Administrator in denying the landlord’s protest of a downward revision of maximum rents. The subject premises had been an unheated tenement that was converted to central heating. An application was made to the Rent Commission for an increase in rent due to the installation of the heating plant. The application was granted in March, 1956. In October, 1957, the Local Rent Administrator notified the landlord that the proceedings, wherein the increase was granted, were being reopened because the landlord had obtained a tax abatement from the city to the extent of 75% of the cost of the improvement over a period of nine years (Administrative Code of City of New York, § J41-2.4) and this relief was not considered in the adjustment of the maximum rent. The landlord argues that the Rent Administrator has no right on its own to reopen a proceeding in which it has granted rent increases. The contention is unfounded (State Rent and Eviction Regulations, § 33). This court has considered this identical problem (Matter of Semel v. Weaver, 17 Misc 2d 73) and resolved it in favor of the respondent. There is nothing in these papers that would warrant a different result. The application is denied and the proceeding is dismissed. Settle order.

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

Henry Epstein, J.

This is a petition to review the determination of the State Rent Administrator in denying the landlord’s protest of a downward revision of maximum rents. The subject premises had been an unheated tenement that was converted to central heating. An application was made to the Rent Commission for an increase in rent due to the installation of the heating plant. The application was granted in March, 1956. In October, 1957, the Local Rent Administrator notified the landlord that the proceedings, wherein the increase was granted, were being reopened because the landlord had obtained a tax abatement from the city to the extent of 75% of the cost of the improvement over a period of nine years (Administrative Code of City of New York, § J41-2.4) and this relief was not considered in the adjustment of the maximum rent. The landlord argues that the Rent Administrator has no right on its own to reopen a proceeding in which it has granted rent increases. The contention is unfounded (State Rent and Eviction Regulations, § 33). This court has considered this identical problem (Matter of Semel v. Weaver, 17 Misc 2d 73) and resolved it in favor of the respondent. There is nothing in these papers that would warrant a different result. The application is denied and the proceeding is dismissed. Settle order.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 Misc. 2d 78, 188 N.Y.S.2d 1030, 1958 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2597, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/raplee-realty-corp-v-weaver-nysupct-1958.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack