Howard-Carol Tenants' Ass'n v. New York City Conciliation & Appeals Board
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
*770OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
Both Special Term and the majority at the Appellate Division concluded that the determination of the Conciliation and Appeals Board, that there had been no diminution in required maintenance services, was supported by substantial evidence and was neither arbitrary nor capricious. We cannot say that this was erroneous as a matter of law. That the board found an absence of "objective criteria”, thus making it "impossible to determine the comparison between the May 31, 1968 and present day levels of…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Mid-State Management Corp. v. New York City Conciliation & Appeals BoardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
- Aguayo v. New York State Division of Housing & Community RenewalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- Sherman v. Commissioner, New York State Division of Housing & Community RenewalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- 218 East 85th Street, LLC v. Division of Housing & Community RenewalNew York Supreme Court · 2009
- Simkowitz v. New York State Division of Housing & Community RenewalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.