Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Citation
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Parent Document
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Jurisdiction
- New York (state)
- Effective Date
- 2015-02-24
Other Sections in This Document (58)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
- Conason v. Megan Holding, LLC, 25 N.Y.3d 1 (2015)
Full Text
957 charsThe apartment in Grimm was registered as rent-stabilized in 1999 at a legal regulated rent of $578.86. In 2000, the landlord increased the rent to $2,000 per month, but informed the incoming tenants that if they agreed to make certain repairs and improvements, the monthly rent would be reduced to $1,450; they agreed to this arrangement. When Grimm moved into the apartment in 2004, she also paid rent of $1,450 per month. In April 2005, she entered into a renewal lease at a monthly rent of $1,500.75. Grimm subsequently filed a rent overcharge complaint with DHCR in July 2005; she complained that the “owner is fraudulently renting [the] apartment as a non-rent stabilized unit and raised [the] rent illegally in 2005. [The] [i]nitial 2004 rent is also illegal.” When DHCR denied Grimm’s complaint because the rent adjustments after the base date (July 2001) were lawful, she brought a CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge the agency’s determination.