Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Montera v. KMR Amsterdam LLC, 193 A.D.3d 102 (2021)

Citation
Montera v. KMR Amsterdam LLC, 193 A.D.3d 102 (2021)
Parent Document
Montera v. KMR Amsterdam LLC, 193 A.D.3d 102 (2021)
Jurisdiction
New York (state)
Effective Date
2021-02-09

Other Sections in This Document (57)

Full Text

706 chars
I believe that no facts have been presented by plaintiff to support his claim that defendant engaged in a fraudulent deregulation scheme to remove apartment 4E from the protections of the rent stabilization law (Matter of Park, 150 AD3d at 114-115). Although defendant intentionally deregulated the apartment in 2009 when the rent increased above the high-rent threshold, defendant's principal avers that it did so consistent with the practice endorsed by DHCR at that time. Plaintiff fails to raise any inference that this is untrue and that there was a fraudulent scheme within the meaning of Grimm and Thornton (see Matter of Boyd v New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 23 NY3d 999 [2014]).