In Roberts v. Tishman Speyer Props.,1 the Court of Appeals, affirming the Appellate Division, First Department, held that luxury deregulation is not available in buildings receiving J-51 benefits. These decisions came as a surprise to hundreds of owners, who had relied on DHCR’s adviceand a DHCR regulationstating that luxury deregulation was indeed available in such buildings.
After Roberts, the issue arose as to how the rents of erroneously deregulated apartments should be recalculated, now that the Court of Appeals had declared these apartments to be rent stabilized. Tenants argued that for a variety of reasons, owners should be denied rent increases that they would otherwise be entitled to, such as (1) statutory vacancy increases; (2) statutory “longevity” increases; (3) individual apartment increases; and (4) standard Rent Guidelines Board renewal increases. Tenants also sought treble damages and attorney fees.
This content has been archived.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]
