Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Grimm v. State, 15 N.Y.3d 358 (2010)

Citation
Grimm v. State, 15 N.Y.3d 358 (2010)
Parent Document
Grimm v. State, 15 N.Y.3d 358 (2010)
Jurisdiction
New York (state)
Effective Date
2010-10-19

Full Text

424 chars
The majority opinion can be read to mean either that the four-year limitation has largely ceased to exist, or that any case to which the limit applies on its face must lead to a mini-litigation, in which DHCR tries to figure out whether the overcharge was “fraudulent” enough to escape the time limit. If the former, the majority has simply tossed aside the Legislature’s command. If the latter, I do not envy DHCR its task.