Legal Opinion · Dissent

Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC

New York Court of Appeals

Decided February 24, 2015Published

1DissentPigott, J.

The majority holds, apparently on the basis of Thornton v Baron (5 NY3d 175 [2005]) and Matter of Grimm v State of N.Y. Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal Off of Rent Admin. (15 NY3d 358 [2010]), that because the tenants “advance a colorable claim of fraud within the meaning of Grimm . . . Supreme Court in this case properly considered tenants’ counterclaim alleging rent overcharges notwithstanding expiration of the four-year statute of limitations to which such claims are generally subject” (majority op at 16). Thornton and Grimm do not support that conclusion, and there are strong policy…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Zumpano v. QuinnNew York Court of Appeals · 2006
  2. Grimm v. StateNew York Court of Appeals · 2010
  3. Thornton v. BaronNew York Court of Appeals · 2005
  4. Cintron v. CalogeroNew York Court of Appeals · 2010
  5. Brinckerhoff v. New York State Division of Housing & Community RenewalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API