Woodson v. Convent 1 LLC, 216 A.D.3d 585 (2023)

Citation: Woodson v. Convent 1 LLC, 216 A.D.3d 585 (2023)
Parent Document: Woodson v. Convent 1 LLC, 216 A.D.3d 585 (2023)
Jurisdiction: New York (state)
Effective Date: 2023-05-30
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/9402711/woodson-v-convent-1-llc/ ↗

Full Text

1,060 chars

Footnote 1: The motion court stated an intention to treat Urisaka's rent as apartment 1B's "initial registration" and to have plaintiffs seek a determination from the DHCR to determine the legal rent on the base date pursuant to the "pre-HSTPA versions of RSL § 26-516." Plaintiffs challenged that determination on grounds that we find unavailing. Nevertheless, we note that the Rent Stabilization Code provides that "[t]he initial legal regulated rent for housing accommodations subject to this Code solely as a condition of receiving or continuing to receive benefits pursuant to section 11-243 (formerly J51-2.5) or 11-244 (formerly J51-5.0) of the Administrative Code of the City of New York, as amended, shall be the rent charged the initial rent-stabilized tenant" (9 NYCRR 2521.1[h]), and that Supreme Court and the DHCR have concurrent jurisdiction over rent overcharge claims (Matter of Hefti v New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 203 AD3d 605 [1st Dept 2022]; see also Administrative Code § 26-516 [a] [2], as amended by L 2019, ch 36).

Other Sections in This Document (17)

Full Text