DHCR Properly Reopened Case

March 1, 1999

LVT Number: 13059

The DRA ruled that tenant's apartment was subject to rent control, and landlord appealed. Landlord later asked the DHCR to reconsider its ruling based on fraud, illegality, or an irregularity in a vital matter. Landlord claimed that tenant was in fact the prior owner of the building. The DHCR reopened the case and ruled for landlord, decontrolling the apartment. Tenant appealed, and the court ruled for tenant and revoked the DHCR's decontrol ruling. Landlord then appealed and won.

The DRA ruled that tenant's apartment was subject to rent control, and landlord appealed. Landlord later asked the DHCR to reconsider its ruling based on fraud, illegality, or an irregularity in a vital matter. Landlord claimed that tenant was in fact the prior owner of the building. The DHCR reopened the case and ruled for landlord, decontrolling the apartment. Tenant appealed, and the court ruled for tenant and revoked the DHCR's decontrol ruling. Landlord then appealed and won. The DHCR properly reopened the case based on fraud, illegality, or irregularity in a vital matter, which it can do at landlord's or tenant's request, or on its own, under the Rent Stabilization Code.

DeVito v. Lynch: NYLJ, p. 32, col. 5 (2/24/99) (App. Div. 2 Dept.; Santucci, JP, Joy, Altman, Krausman, JJ)

Topics

More like this