Aras v. B-U Realty Corp., 2023 NY Slip Op 04917 (2023)

Citation: Aras v. B-U Realty Corp., 2023 NY Slip Op 04917 (2023)
Parent Document: Aras v. B-U Realty Corp., 2023 NY Slip Op 04917 (2023)
Jurisdiction: New York (state)
Effective Date: 2023-10-03
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/9430365/aras-v-b-u-realty-corp/ ↗

Full Text

1,014 chars

The deregulation at issue in Casey "was based on the same 'misinterpretation of law' involved in Regina" (Casey, 39 NY3d at 1107, quoting Regina, 35 NY3d at 356), that is, a pre-Roberts deregulation "consistent with agency guidance" (Regina, 35 NY3d at 356). Since the claim of fraudulent deregulation in Casey was based, at its core, on good faith Roberts deregulation alone, the Court of Appeals held that the defendants' "conduct did not constitute fraud" (Casey, 39 NY3d at 1107). The Casey Court's statement regarding the method of calculating overcharges, which is relied on by the majority, as discussed below, must therefore be read as deciding the appeal before it on its own facts, which concerned only non-fraud Roberts claims (id.). Indeed, the brief Casey memorandum acknowledged that "[i[*15]]n fraud cases, because the reliability of the base date rent has been tainted, 'this Court sanctioned use of the default formula to set the base date rent'" (39 NY3d at 1106, quoting Regina, 35 NY3d at 355).

Other Sections in This Document (169)

Full Text