NEXT

Jeffrey Turkel

Jeffrey Turkel

May 02, 2017 | New York Law Journal

Landlords Win in Two First Department Cases

In their Rent Regulstion column, Warren Estis and Jeffrey Turkel discuss two recent decisions, "Matter of Park v. NYSDHCR," and "Dixon v. 105 West 75th Street," where the Appellate Division, First Department held, over rigorous tenant objections, that the apartments in question were exempt from rent stabilization.

By Warren Estis and Jeffrey Turkel

13 minute read

February 28, 2017 | New York Law Journal

Commercial to Residential Substantial Rehabilitation

In their Rent Regulation column, Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel discuss the topic of "substantial rehabilitation" and look at whether units converted from commercial to residential use are exempt from "stabilization per se."

By Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel

14 minute read

January 03, 2017 | New York Law Journal

The 'Altman' Conundrum (Continued)

In their Rent Regulation column, Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel examine how the Appellate Division in 'Altman v. 285 W. Fourth, LLC' and the Appellate Term in 'Aimco 322 E. 61st Street v. Brosius' have arrived at differing interpretations of the same statutory deregulation threshold scheme.

By Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel

15 minute read

November 01, 2016 | New York Law Journal

Conditional Rentals Can Lead to Default Rent Formula

In their Rent Regulation column, Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel discuss how some landlords have been known to insert clauses into leases where the incoming tenant represents that they will not be a primary resident of the apartment. This is usually part of a scam to "deregulate" an apartment that was otherwise subject to rent stabilization. They explain that such clauses are illegal and discuss how these clauses have resulted in adverse consequences to both individual landlords and the real estate industry as a whole.

By Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel

17 minute read

September 07, 2016 | New York Law Journal

Newly Created Apartment is Luxury Deregulated

In their Rent Stabilization column, Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel discuss case law, "First-Rent Rule" case law, including 'Rubin v. Decker Assoc.,' and write: The creation of new units has always been the gold standard for raising rents and avoiding rent overcharge claims. As 'Rubin' makes clear, creating a new unit has the added benefit of permanently deregulating that unit if the first rent charged exceeds the luxury deregulation threshold.

By Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel

16 minute read

July 06, 2016 | New York Law Journal

Individual Apartment Improvements: an Overview

In their Rent Regulation column, Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel discuss a landlord's right to add new equipment and improvements to an apartment, thus enabling a rent increase.

By Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel

17 minute read

May 04, 2016 | New York Law Journal

How Grim is 'Grimm'?

In their Rent Regulation column, Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel examine recent case law interpreting and applying 'Grimm v. DHCRl,' where the Court of Appeals ruled that the four-year look-back period for determining a stabilized rent can be breached where a tenant can establish that the base rent was tainted by fraud; or at the least, can raise a colorable claim of fraud.

By Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel

16 minute read

March 02, 2016 | New York Law Journal

Luxury Decontrol: Is a J-51 Notice Required?

In their Rent Regulation column, Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel survey the relevant case law over the last four years regarding the issue of whether an owner, in order to obtain high-rent high income luxury deregulation in a building that formerly received J-51 benefits, must first serve the tenant with a so-called J-51 notice.

By Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel

9 minute read

January 06, 2016 | New York Law Journal

The Altman Conundrum

In their Rent Regulation column, Warren Estis and Jeffrey Turkel discuss vacancy luxury deregulation in light of the cases 'Altman v. 285 West Fourth, LLC,' 'Aimco 322 East 61st Street v. Brosius,' and 'Dixon v. 105 West 75th Street.'

By Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel

10 minute read

January 05, 2016 | New York Law Journal

The Altman Conundrum

In their Rent Regulation column, Warren Estis and Jeffrey Turkel discuss vacancy luxury deregulation in light of the cases 'Altman v. 285 West Fourth, LLC,' 'Aimco 322 East 61st Street v. Brosius,' and 'Dixon v. 105 West 75th Street.'

By Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel

10 minute read