Wembly Management Co. v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wembly Management Co. v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal

203 A.D.2d 118, 612 N.Y.S.2d 843

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 14, 1994·Published

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Burton Sherman, J.), entered October 7, 1992, which confirmed an order and opinion of respondent Division of Housing and Community Renewal dated September 12, 1991, affirming an administrator’s order granting a Fair Market Rent Appeal reduction, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Upon the record related to the matter, we find that there was a rational basis for the respondent agency’s conclusion, reached after proceedings that fully accorded petitioner due process (see, Matter of Sun v Division of Hous. & Community Renewal, 137 Misc 2d 434, 437), that petitioner had waived its claim that the tenant’s Fair Market Rent Appeal was not timely by not asserting it prior to the administrative appeal.

We have considered the petitioner’s remaining arguments, and find them to be without merit. Concur — Carro, J. P., Wallach, Rubin and Nardelli, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Burton Sherman, J.), entered October 7, 1992, which confirmed an order and opinion of respondent Division of Housing and Community Renewal dated September 12, 1991, affirming an administrator’s order granting a Fair Market Rent Appeal reduction, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Upon the record related to the matter, we find that there was a rational basis for the respondent agency’s conclusion, reached after proceedings that fully accorded petitioner due process (see, Matter of Sun v Division of Hous. & Community Renewal, 137 Misc 2d 434, 437), that petitioner had waived its claim that the tenant’s Fair Market Rent Appeal was not timely by not asserting it prior to the administrative appeal.

We have considered the petitioner’s remaining arguments, and find them to be without merit. Concur — Carro, J. P., Wallach, Rubin and Nardelli, JJ.

Wembly Management Co. v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal, 203 A.D.2d 118, 612 N.Y.S.2d 843 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

203 A.D.2d 118 (Wembly Management Co. v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related