Pierre v. Williams, 106 Misc. 2d 81 (1980)
- Citation
- Pierre v. Williams, 106 Misc. 2d 81 (1980)
- Parent Document
- Pierre v. Williams, 106 Misc. 2d 81 (1980)
- Jurisdiction
- New York (state)
- Effective Date
- 1980-05-09
Other Sections in This Document (19)
- Pierre v. Williams, 106 Misc. 2d 81 (1980)
- Pierre v. Williams, 106 Misc. 2d 81 (1980)
- Pierre v. Williams, 106 Misc. 2d 81 (1980)
- Pierre v. Williams, 106 Misc. 2d 81 (1980)
- Pierre v. Williams, 106 Misc. 2d 81 (1980)
- Pierre v. Williams, 106 Misc. 2d 81 (1980)
- Pierre v. Williams, 106 Misc. 2d 81 (1980)
- Pierre v. Williams, 106 Misc. 2d 81 (1980)
- Pierre v. Williams, 106 Misc. 2d 81 (1980)
- Pierre v. Williams, 106 Misc. 2d 81 (1980)
- Pierre v. Williams, 106 Misc. 2d 81 (1980)
- Pierre v. Williams, 106 Misc. 2d 81 (1980)
- Pierre v. Williams, 106 Misc. 2d 81 (1980)
- Pierre v. Williams, 106 Misc. 2d 81 (1980)
- Pierre v. Williams, 106 Misc. 2d 81 (1980)
- Pierre v. Williams, 106 Misc. 2d 81 (1980)
- Pierre v. Williams, 106 Misc. 2d 81 (1980)
- Pierre v. Williams, 106 Misc. 2d 81 (1980)
- Pierre v. Williams, 106 Misc. 2d 81 (1980)
Full Text
610 charsThe CAB, in implementing the rent stabilization law, has, on numerous occasions, dealt with instances where a renewal lease was not tendered but the tenant nevertheless remitted an increased rental for a period of time. In some instances, such period was for three years. In those cases, the CAB deemed that a lease was created retroactive to the expiration date of the original lease, provided the increased rental was not in violation of CAB guidelines. This retroactive lease was deemed to be identical to the expired lease in all terms and conditions except rent (see Hudson v Jeudy, CAB Case No. 21482-G).