Ziman v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal
557 N.E.2d 112, 76 N.Y.2d 727, 557 N.Y.S.2d 876, 1990 N.Y. LEXIS 1273
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
Order affirmed, with costs, for reasons stated in the memorandum of the Appellate Division (153 AD2d 489). We add only that, in view of the unrefuted evidence of hardship, including two unchallenged audit reports prepared by DHCR’s own Accounting Division, it was not improper for the Appellate Division to remit the matter to DHCR with instructions to grant the petition.
Concur: Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Ziman v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal, 557 N.E.2d 112, 76 N.Y.2d 727, 557 N.Y.S.2d 876, 1990 N.Y. LEXIS 1273 (N.Y. 1990).
557 N.E.2d 112 (Ziman v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Rizzo v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal
16 A.D.3d 72 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)