Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

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

Other Sections in This Document (169)

Full Text

843 chars
As discussed above, the Court of Appeals stated the question presented in Regina as: "what is the proper method for calculating the recoverable rent overcharge for New York City apartments that were improperly removed from rent stabilization [*18]during receipt of J-51 benefits prior to [the] 2009 decision in Roberts" (Regina,35 NY3d at 348, citing Roberts, 13 NY3d at 270). In deciding the four appeals [FN7] before it, the Regina Court ultimately held that none of the landlords had engaged in a fraudulent scheme to deregulate the apartments, since "the owners removed apartments from stabilization consistent with agency guidance," and the deregulations were "not based on a fraudulent misstatement of fact but on a misinterpretation of the law — significantly, one that DHCR itself adopted and included in its regulations" (id. at 356).