Legal Opinion

Ortiz v. Sohngen

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided April 7, 2017Published

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs.

In this holdover proceeding, the petition alleges that the subject apartment is not rent regulated because it “is within a building containing less than six apartments.” Pursuant to a stipulation, so much of the proceeding as was against tenant Oliver M. Sohngen was discontinued. Amanda Andries (tenant) answered, asserting that the building contained more than six residential units and that the petition was defective because it failed to accurately state the rent-regulatory status of the building. Tenant moved to…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Commercial Hotel, Inc. v. WhiteAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 2002
  2. Department of Housing Preservation & Development v. GottliebCivil Court of the City of New York · 1987
  3. Barcher v. RadovichAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992

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

Powered by the Exa API