Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta 78/79 York Associates v. Rand 180 Misc. 2d 316

← Cases

78/79 York Associates v. Rand

180 Misc. 2d 316 Court Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department, Decision date 1999-04-19 English

Contents

Majority

p. 316
[691 NYS2d 875]
78/79 York Associates, Appellant, v Roland Rand, Respondent.
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
April 19, 1999
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Amsterdam & Lewinter, New York City (Mark Lewinter and Charles J. Seigel of counsel), and Pennisi, Daniels & Norelli, L. L. P., Baldwin (Karen Schwartz-Sidrane and Sherrie Taylor of counsel), for appellant. Jeffrey S. Ween & Associates, New
p. 317
York City (Jeffrey S. Ween of counsel), for respondent. Marcia P. Hirsch, New York City (Martin B. Schneider of counsel), for New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal, amicus curiae.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Order dated January 28, 1998 affirmed, with $10 costs.

Tenant’s rent overcharge counterclaim, interposéd in October 1995, is not barred under amended CPLR 213-a or amended Rent Stabilization Law of 1969 (Administrative Code of City of NY) § 26-516 (a). Those statutes preclude examination of the rental history of the housing accommodation prior to the four-year period immediately preceding the filing of a complaint or commencement of an action. The instant counterclaim does not seek inquiry into the legality of rent increases prior to the four-year period since it is challenging the amount of rent ($750) set forth in landlord’s July 1992 registration statement (cf., Zafra v Pilkes, 245 AD2d 218 ; Theoharidou v Newgarden, 176 Misc 2d 97 ). The rent registration statement in effect four years prior to the interposition of tenant’s claim set forth a legal rent of $267.45. Accordingly, tenant is entitled to recover any overcharges paid within four years of its October 1995 claim.

Freedman, J. P., and Davis, J., concur.

Cases cited