Tipco Realty Corp. v. Housing & Development Administration

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Tipco Realty Corp. v. Housing & Development Administration

37 A.D.2d 526, 322 N.Y.S.2d 976, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3898

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

DecidedJune 8, 1971

StatusPublished

This text of 37 A.D.2d 526 (Tipco Realty Corp. v. Housing & Development Administration) 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

Tipco Realty Corp. v. Housing & Development Administration, 37 A.D.2d 526, 322 N.Y.S.2d 976, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3898 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered March 23,1970, insofar as it denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs and without disbursements, the motion granted, and judgment is directed to be entered declaring that plaintiff’s premises are subject to rent control under Administrative Code, title Y, chapter 51 and that section YY51-3.0 of the Rent Stabilization Law of 1969 is applicable to plaintiff’s premises. The appeal from that portion of said order directing examination before trial dismissed as moot. The facts are clearly established and there is no need for a trial. Substantial alterations and structural changes were made in 1956 as a result of which there was created additional housing in the subject building by subdividing apartments. A decontrol application was made, pursuant to section 11 of the State Rent and Eviction Regulations and same was granted in 1958. Further, it is admitted that plaintiff did not join the Rent Stabilization Association, as provided by the Rent Stabilization Law for landlords who are desirous of avoiding the results of standard rent control for premises covered by said law. On the record before us it is clear that section YY51-3.0 of the Rent Stabilization Law is applicable to plaintiff’s premises. This is without prejudice to any application the owner may see fit to make to join the Rent Stabilization Association of New York City, Inc. Concur — Stevens, P. J., Capozzoli, Nunez, Kupferman and McNally, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered March 23,1970, insofar as it denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs and without disbursements, the motion granted, and judgment is directed to be entered declaring that plaintiff’s premises are subject to rent control under Administrative Code, title Y, chapter 51 and that section YY51-3.0 of the Rent Stabilization Law of 1969 is applicable to plaintiff’s premises. The appeal from that portion of said order directing examination before trial dismissed as moot. The facts are clearly established and there is no need for a trial. Substantial alterations and structural changes were made in 1956 as a result of which there was created additional housing in the subject building by subdividing apartments. A decontrol application was made, pursuant to section 11 of the State Rent and Eviction Regulations and same was granted in 1958. Further, it is admitted that plaintiff did not join the Rent Stabilization Association, as provided by the Rent Stabilization Law for landlords who are desirous of avoiding the results of standard rent control for premises covered by said law. On the record before us it is clear that section YY51-3.0 of the Rent Stabilization Law is applicable to plaintiff’s premises. This is without prejudice to any application the owner may see fit to make to join the Rent Stabilization Association of New York City, Inc. Concur — Stevens, P. J., Capozzoli, Nunez, Kupferman and McNally, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

37 A.D.2d 526, 322 N.Y.S.2d 976, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3898, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tipco-realty-corp-v-housing-development-administration-nyappdiv-1971.