Legal Opinion

Rickman Realty Corp. v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal

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

Decided November 25, 2002Published

1Opinion of the Court

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

*553Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal (hereinafter the DHCR) reasonably and rationally determined that the installation of windows in a defective and unworkmanlike manner was not a “major capital improvement,” notwithstanding the passage of time between the installation of the windows and the DHCR’s inspection (Rent Stabilization Code [9 NYCRR] § 2522.4 [a] [2]; see Matter of Ansonia Residents Assn, v New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 75 NY2d 206; Matter of 36-08…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Ansonia Residents Ass'n v. New York State Division of Housing & Community RenewalNew York Court of Appeals · 1989
  2. West Village Associates v. Division of Housing & Community RenewalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
  3. 36-08 Queens Realty v. New York State Division of Housing & Community RenewalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
  4. Simkowitz v. New York State Division of Housing & Community RenewalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
  5. Wesley Avenue Associates v. New York State Division of Housing & Community RenewalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994

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

Powered by the Exa API