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

612 chars
Moreover, and as noted, in its review of the applicable law, the Regina Court reaffirmed its holdings in Thornton (5 NY3d 175), Grimm (15 NY3d 358), and Conason (25 NY3d 1) (see Regina, 35 NY3d at 355-356). In both Conason and Thornton, the Court of Appeals held that fraud had been established and thus resort to the default formula was merited (Conason, 25 NY3d at 18; Thornton, 5 NY3d at 181). In Grimm, the Court held that "there existed substantial indicia of fraud on the record" such that DHCR had "an obligation to ascertain whether the rent on the base date [wa]s a lawful rent" (Grimm, 15 NY3d at 366).