Trial Required on Whether Building Was Substantially Rehabilitated

April 30, 2001

LVT Number: 14970

Tenants sued landlord, claiming that their apartments were rent stabilized. They claimed that they had resided primarily in the building for years. Landlord claimed that the building was a commercial loft in a light-manufacturing district, without a Certificate of Occupancy, and so it couldn't be rent regulated. Landlord asked the court to dismiss the case without a trial. The court ruled against landlord. There was a question of fact as to whether residential use was permitted in the building. A trial was required before a decision could be made.

Tenants sued landlord, claiming that their apartments were rent stabilized. They claimed that they had resided primarily in the building for years. Landlord claimed that the building was a commercial loft in a light-manufacturing district, without a Certificate of Occupancy, and so it couldn't be rent regulated. Landlord asked the court to dismiss the case without a trial. The court ruled against landlord. There was a question of fact as to whether residential use was permitted in the building. A trial was required before a decision could be made.

Miller v. Margab Realty LLC: NYLJ, 4/11/01, p. 19, col. 2 (Sup. Ct. NY; Schlesinger, J)

Topics

More like this