Jeffrey Turkel

January 07, 2015 | New York Law Journal

In their Rent Regulation column, Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel discuss how the Court of Appeals now allows class actions for New York City tenants bringing J-51 rent overcharge lawsuits.

By Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel

9 minute read

January 07, 2015 | New York Law Journal

In their Rent Regulation column, Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel discuss how the Court of Appeals now allows class actions for New York City tenants bringing J-51 rent overcharge lawsuits.

By Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel

9 minute read

November 05, 2014 | New York Law Journal

In their Rent Regulation column, Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel of Rosenberg & Estis discuss 'Ram I v. DHCR,', and explain why the First Department held that with respect to most rent-stabilized apartments, a landlord regains the right to obtain luxury deregulation once J-51 benefits expire.

By Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel

8 minute read

September 03, 2014 | New York Law Journal

In their Rent Stabilization column, Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel of Rosenberg & Estis discuss the current landscape of owner occupancy proceedings since the 2008 case 'Pultz v. Economakis,' and write: Notwithstanding a small number of owners who have attempted to vacate entire buildings, the flood of “mass eviction” owner occupancy proceedings, feared in the wake of 'Pultz,' has not materialized.

By Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel

9 minute read

July 02, 2014 | New York Law Journal

In their Rent Regulation column, Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel discuss a recent ruling that buildings converted on or after Jan. 1, 1974 from commercial to residential use are exempt from rent stabilization, even if the owner has not satisfied all of the substantial rehabilitation requirements.

By Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel

8 minute read

May 07, 2014 | New York Law Journal

In their Rent Regulation column, Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel write: One might imagine that it is a simple matter to determine how many dwelling units a building has. Nothing in the rent regulation, however, is a simple matter.

By Warrant A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel

8 minute read

April 10, 2014 | New York Law Journal

Rosenberg & Estis partners Jeffrey Turkel and Joshua Kopelowitz write that with no appellate authority on whether a waiver in a commercial lease of a tenant's right to seek a Yellowstone injunction is enforceable, lower courts have taken three different approaches: denial of Yellowstone relief on other grounds; refusal to enforce the waiver, on public policy or other grounds; and enforcement of the waiver.

By Jeffrey Turkel and Joshua Kopelowitz

10 minute read

March 05, 2014 | New York Law Journal

In their Rent Regulation column, Warren Estis and Jeffrey Turkel of Rosenberg & Estis write: Although the rules for rent stabilized apartments are clear, it remains to be seen how other courts will view DHCR's ruling that high income deregulation is forever prohibited for rent controlled apartments where the building in question has received J-51 benefits.

By Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel

8 minute read

January 08, 2014 | New York Law Journal

In their Rent Regulation column, Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel of Rosenberg & Estis, first review 'Grimm v. New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal,' where the Court of Appeals held that the Division of Housing and Community Renewal or a court can ignore the four-year look-back period for rent overcharge claims where the tenant raises a "colorable" claim of fraud. They then discuss 'Boyd v. New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal,' where the court held that the tenant had raised a colorable claim of fraud, which DHCR had failed to properly investigate.

By Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel

8 minute read

November 06, 2013 | New York Law Journal

In their Rent Regulation column, Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel of Rosenberg & Estis, discuss 'Murphy v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal,' where the Court of Appeals, by a 4-3 margin, determined that the DHCR had misinterpreted its own succession regulation with respect to a Mitchell-Lama tenant.

By Warren A. Estis and Jeffrey Turkel

8 minute read