Legal Opinion

West v. 332 East 84th Owners Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided December 10, 2009PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

The record raises no issues of fact whether the board’s reason for denying plaintiffs’ request to construct a new bathroom in *500their apartment, i.e., that it would violate a recently enacted building policy to prohibit “wet” construction over “dry” space, was legitimately related to the welfare of the cooperative and therefore a reasonable basis for withholding consent (see Seven Park Ave. Corp. v Green, 277 AD2d 123 [2000], lv denied 96 NY2d 853 [2001]; Rosenthal v One Hudson Park, 269 AD2d 144 [2000]). Plaintiffs submitted no evidence that the space below the proposed bathroom was not “dry”…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Rosenthal v. One Hudson Park, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Perrault v. Village Dunes Apt. Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2018

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

Powered by the Exa API