This article’s original title was taken from the alleged ancient Chinese curse “May you live in interesting times.” It was changed to maintain clarity, and to dispel any misapprehension that the author might lurch into a discussion of COVID-19, racist scapegoating and/or partisan political posturing. Nope. And too bad for you. Instead of pushing topical hot buttons, this article discusses the “knock-on” effects of a turbulent decade of Court of Appeals rent overcharge jurisprudence, which is a topic known to induce narcolepsy.
In particular, there have been ominous ripple effects in the three loosely related fields of residential landlord/tenant litigation, residential property management, and real property-backed securities trading. This article proposes NO solutions. The frustrating truth is that many of the last decade’s attempts to resolve problems plaguing rent overcharge litigation have instead led to—more problems. This is known as “the law of unintended consequences.” The article is presented in three parts.
Part I
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]