Riverbend Housing Co. v. Stephenson, 172 Misc. 2d 385 (1997)
- Citation
- Riverbend Housing Co. v. Stephenson, 172 Misc. 2d 385 (1997)
- Parent Document
- Riverbend Housing Co. v. Stephenson, 172 Misc. 2d 385 (1997)
- Jurisdiction
- New York (state)
- Effective Date
- 1997-02-27
Other Sections in This Document (5)
- Riverbend Housing Co. v. Stephenson, 172 Misc. 2d 385 (1997)
- Riverbend Housing Co. v. Stephenson, 172 Misc. 2d 385 (1997)
- Riverbend Housing Co. v. Stephenson, 172 Misc. 2d 385 (1997)
- Riverbend Housing Co. v. Stephenson, 172 Misc. 2d 385 (1997)
- Riverbend Housing Co. v. Stephenson, 172 Misc. 2d 385 (1997)
Full Text
580 charsIt is clear from the record that if the equity increase had not been approved, the cooperative board would have been compelled to seek a carrying charge increase in order to preserve the building’s physical integrity. Whether the plan adopted to pay for necessary repairs takes the form of an increase in the monthly maintenance, or a capital assessment to be paid monthly over a fixed period, the housing company is entitled to *387invoke its possessory remedy for default in payment and should not be limited to a plenary action. Ostrau, P. J., McCooe and Freedman, JJ., concur.