Property · MBE-tested
In the Matter of Arthur D. Zinberg, Appellant, v. State of New York Division of Housing and Community Renewal, Office of Rent Administration, et al., Respondents
216 A.D.2d 22627 N.Y.S.2d 637·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1995·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
In the Matter of Arthur D. Zinberg, Appellant, v State of New York Division of Housing and Community Renewal, Office of Rent Administration, et al., Respondents.
[627 NYS2d 637]
[MAJORITY]
Judgment (denominated an order), Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.), entered October 12, 1994, which denied petitioner’s application pursuant to CPLR article 78 to annul respondents’ determination that petitioner had failed to maintain as an essential building-wide service, a bell/ buzzer system, and reducing the rent of certain rent controlled tenants by $3 a month, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
A rational basis for respondents’ determination that a bell/ buzzer system existed as of the 1962 base date can be found in the 1977 agreement of some of the tenants acknowledging that the bell/buzzer system had been discontinued but without indicating when. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Ross and Mazzarelli, JJ.