Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Law (9762)
- International Law (1184)
- Intellectual Property Law (769)
- Constitutional Law (472)
- Entertainment, Arts, and Sports Law (415)
-
- Criminal Law (338)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (233)
- Business Organizations Law (219)
- Environmental Law (215)
- Law and Society (204)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (189)
- Banking and Finance Law (185)
- Administrative Law (154)
- Courts (148)
- Law and Politics (139)
- Judges (131)
- Property Law and Real Estate (126)
- Legislation (124)
- First Amendment (122)
- State and Local Government Law (121)
- Supreme Court of the United States (108)
- Legal History (104)
- Civil Law (97)
- Election Law (96)
- Criminal Procedure (95)
- Civil Procedure (94)
- Jurisprudence (93)
- Legal Profession (93)
- Torts (93)
- Law and Gender (91)
- Keyword
-
- Ethics (247)
- Constitution (242)
- Copyright (131)
- First Amendment (125)
- Constitutional law (109)
-
- Criminal law (107)
- Antitrust (105)
- Privacy (98)
- Bankruptcy (96)
- Fordham Law Student Newspaper (94)
- Evidence (92)
- Property (90)
- First amendment (89)
- Law (88)
- Regulation (88)
- Presidential Succession (84)
- Tax (84)
- Religion (83)
- Securities (83)
- Constitutional Law (80)
- Twenty-Fifth Amendment (80)
- 1984 Presidential Campaign (78)
- 25th Amendment (78)
- United States Politics (78)
- Women Politicians (78)
- New York (76)
- International Law (74)
- Race (74)
- Professional responsibility (73)
- Discrimination (72)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Fordham Law Review (4293)
- All Decisions (1756)
- Fordham Urban Law Journal (1627)
- Fordham International Law Journal (1452)
- Faculty Scholarship (1102)
-
- Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal (691)
- Parole Administrative Appeal Decisions (374)
- Fordham Environmental Law Review (316)
- Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings (305)
- Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law (277)
- The Advocate (100)
- Law School Bulletins 1905-2000 (92)
- Fordham Law Review Online (87)
- Speeches (66)
- Correspondence (56)
- Fordham Law Voting Rights and Democracy Forum (44)
- Congressional Materials (36)
- Fordham Lawyer (33)
- Art. 78 Petitions (28)
- Faculty Bibliography (23)
- Reports (23)
- Art. 78 Responses (20)
- Res Gestae (19)
- 29th Annual Intellectual Property Law & Policy Conference (2022) (18)
- 27th Annual Intellectual Property Law & Policy Conference (2019) (17)
- Amicus Briefs (15)
- Maloney Matters (15)
- SJD Dissertations (15)
- Parole Administrative Appeal Briefs (14)
- Executive Branch Materials (13)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 1051 - 1080 of 13109
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Rispoli, John (2021-03-01)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Rispoli, John (2021-03-01)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
1372 Shakespeare Ave Hdfc V. Perez
1372 Shakespeare Ave Hdfc V. Perez
All Decisions
In this nonpayment case, landlord seeks possession of the unregulated premises due to rental arrears. Tenant moves to dismiss, citing defects in the petition under the recently enacted Good Cause Eviction Law (GCEL), arguing that the landlord failed to comply with new pleading requirements. Landlord cross-moves to amend the petition to conform to GCEL. The court grants tenant's motion in part, allowing the proposed amended answer to be filed, but denies dismissal. The landlord's motion to amend the petition is also granted, as the petition was filed before GCEL's effective date, and there was no showing of prejudice to the …
Jopep Llc V. Cardo
All Decisions
In a holdover proceeding alleging non-primary residence in a rent-stabilized apartment, landlord sought possession after tenant failed to renew lease claiming absence from the premises. Tenant sought a stay pending DHCR's decision, but the court ruled against it, asserting jurisdiction for determining primary residence lies with the court, not DHCR. The court cited statutory provisions and precedent allowing flexibility in defining primary residence under rent stabilization laws, ultimately denying tenant's motion and remanding the case for further proceedings in landlord's favor.
Mia V. Lyons
All Decisions
The landlord initiated a holdover proceeding against the tenant, claiming that the tenant's tenancy had expired. The tenant defended the proceeding by asserting that the apartment was rent-stabilized. The landlord denied that the building contained six or more units. The court granted the tenant's motion for summary judgment, finding that the new evidence from the New York City Department of Buildings showed that the building had been converted to a seven-unit building in 2002, and that the tenant had met her burden of demonstrating a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. The court rejected …
Regulatory Takings In Climate Change: Geo- Engineering One’S Way Around The Fifth Amendment, Noah Chase
Regulatory Takings In Climate Change: Geo- Engineering One’S Way Around The Fifth Amendment, Noah Chase
Fordham Environmental Law Review
Picture yourself as the owner of a small business located in the downtown area of a large city; your business consists of a shop and an adjoining parking lot. A new regulation has just been passed which requires any owner of property within the city limits to paint all roofs and parking areas with a new reflective coating, in order to reduce the heat which is absorbed by such structures. The idea of closing your business down for this time, along with other connected issues, scares you, and you begin to wonder if your local government truly has your best …
Arizona V. Navajo Nation And Systemic Failures In The Tribal Water Allocation Scheme, Jennifer Horkovich
Arizona V. Navajo Nation And Systemic Failures In The Tribal Water Allocation Scheme, Jennifer Horkovich
Fordham Environmental Law Review
When the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Arizona v. Navajo Nation was published in June 2023, Indian Country was hardly surprised with the Court’s ruling. There, the Court found that the United States had no affirmative duty to affirmatively protect the Navajo Nation’s water rights under the 1868 Treaty.1 The Court was clear: the treaty is insufficient for the Navajo’s current water needs, but the judiciary is unable to step in to find relief.2 This decision is another in a long series of cases on water allocation and the federal reserved water right, where tribes have been unable to …
Environmental Protection, Sustainability And The Prevention Of Satellite Collisions In Outer Space, Yun Zhao
Environmental Protection, Sustainability And The Prevention Of Satellite Collisions In Outer Space, Yun Zhao
Fordham Environmental Law Review
With space commercialization and privatization continuing apace, more space objects are expected to be launched and put into operation in the future, adding to the already large number of defunct satellites and space debris present in outer space. Hence, serious study should be devoted to possible mechanisms for dealing with potential collisions in outer space for the purpose of realizing environmental protection and space sustainability. In view of the inadequacy of the existing legal regime, this article explores possible such mechanisms (including a preventive mechanism, avoidance mechanism and compensation mechanism) from the perspective of interdependence theory and puts forward a …
1532-1609 Ocean Ave Llc V. Hertzan
1532-1609 Ocean Ave Llc V. Hertzan
All Decisions
The landlord commenced a nonpayment proceeding against the tenant based on the tenant's alleged default on rent for an unregulated apartment. The tenant argued that the apartment was illegally deregulated and the landlord is charging an illegal rent. The court granted the tenant's motion to amend their answer to include a claim of fraudulent deregulation. The court also granted the tenant's motion for discovery to allow them to investigate their claims. The court found that the tenant had raised a colorable claim of fraudulent deregulation and that discovery was necessary to determine the apartment's regulatory status.
City Of New York V. Goldman
All Decisions
In this nuisance abatement action, the court granted defendants leave to renew their motion seeking demolition of the premises instead of permanent repairs. Despite new facts presented, the court upheld its original decision mandating defendants to repair the property to comply with safety standards and maintain it as habitable under rent regulations. The court highlighted the City's authority to enforce building codes and the defendants' obligation to comply with court orders, emphasizing public safety and the preservation of affordable housing amidst landlord's persistent demolition requests.
309e75 Stone Llc V. Ramos
All Decisions
The landlord commenced a non-payment proceeding against the tenant based on the tenant's alleged default on rent for a market rate apartment. The tenant argued that the apartment was illegally deregulated and the landlord is charging an illegal rent. The court granted the tenant's motion for discovery to allow them to investigate their claims. The court also denied the landlord's motions to strike the tenant's defenses and for summary judgment. The court found that there are triable issues of fact concerning the apartment's regulatory status and fraud.
Saucier V. Board Of Mgrs. Of 9 Barrow Condominium
Saucier V. Board Of Mgrs. Of 9 Barrow Condominium
All Decisions
In a holdover-nuisance case in a co-op setting, the tenant sought a preliminary injunction due to excessive noise from building HVAC equipment, alleging breach of proprietary lease and by-laws. Tenants demonstrated likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm, with noise levels violating city codes. The court granted a preliminary injunction directing the board to expedite noise remediation efforts, emphasizing tenant's health risks and overriding need for relief despite ongoing mitigation efforts by the board.
Rhodes V. New Bedford Management Corp.
Rhodes V. New Bedford Management Corp.
All Decisions
The court denied tenant's motion for summary judgment in a non-payment dispute concerning surcharges and fees related to an income affidavit. The tenant failed to exhaust administrative remedies and establish the landlord's actions were arbitrary or unlawful under HPD rules. The court emphasized the tenant's obligation to comply with HPD income reporting requirements and procedural fairness in surcharge assessments, declining to grant summary judgment due to unresolved material facts and procedural lapses.
41-47 Nick Llc V. Odumosu
All Decisions
Landlord sued tenant in a non-payment proceeding for a rent-stabilized apartment. Tenant claims fraudulent overcharge and seeks rent reduction. The case hinges on whether the court will apply the new Chapter Amendments standard (totality of the circumstances) or the stricter Burrows decision for fraudulent overcharge claims in rent-stabilized apartments.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Green, Yvette (2024-05-03)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Green, Yvette (2024-05-03)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Matter Of Tsegai V. New York State Div. Of Hous. & Community Renewal
Matter Of Tsegai V. New York State Div. Of Hous. & Community Renewal
All Decisions
The appellate court affirmed DHCR's denial of petitioner's rent overcharge complaint, finding DHCR's determination that the apartment was deregulated before petitioner's tenancy to be rational and not arbitrary. The decision upheld DHCR's consideration of the registration history and improvements made to the unit, supporting the conclusion that the rent exceeded deregulation thresholds due to lawful individual apartment improvements (IAIs). The court rejected petitioner's arguments challenging the sufficiency of evidence and DHCR's application of its policies, emphasizing DHCR's discretion in evaluating deregulation claims and its adherence to statutory and regulatory requirements governing rent stabilization.
Singer V. Bezark
All Decisions
The rent stabilized tenant of record ("landlord" for the purposes of record structure on this project website) initiated a holdover proceeding against their subtenants, seeking to recover possession of the subject premises. The subtenants interposed an answer with affirmative defenses and counterclaims. The court denied the subtenants' motion for discovery and denied the landlord's motion for summary judgment. The court found that the subtenants failed to plead a valid illusory tenancy affirmative defense and that there were disputed issues of fact requiring trial regarding whether a month-to-month tenancy was created after expiration of the sublease agreement. The court also noted …
Thomas Jefferson Owners Corp. V. Lokshin
Thomas Jefferson Owners Corp. V. Lokshin
All Decisions
In this co-op non-payment proceeding, landlord sought to amend the petition to include additional fees post-amendment of RPAPL § 702, which was denied due to lack of retroactive applicability. The court also denied landlord's request for use and occupancy under RPAPL § 745, finding insufficient grounds under the statute. The case highlighted statutory interpretation regarding the recovery of fees in summary proceedings and the strict application of statutory timelines for granting use and occupancy. Ultimately, the tenant prevailed in resisting landlord's motions, shaping procedural outcomes under co-op housing regulations and landlord-tenant law.
Banana Kelly Prospect Hdfc. V. Banks
Banana Kelly Prospect Hdfc. V. Banks
All Decisions
In this case, Banana Kelly Prospect HDFC initiated a non-payment summary proceeding against tenant Banks, which was settled by stipulation requiring repairs prior to rent payment. Dispute arose when Banks alleged non-compliance with repair terms, prompting a motion for contempt by Banks. The court ruled on proper service and the requirement of clear and unequivocal orders for contempt, ultimately denying Banks' motion due to the order's ambiguity and lack of clear mandate on repair deadlines, affirming that willfulness is not a prerequisite for civil contempt under New York law.
Board Of Mgrs. For Crotona Towers Condominium V. Jenser Llc
Board Of Mgrs. For Crotona Towers Condominium V. Jenser Llc
All Decisions
In this non-payment action concerning condominium common charges, the plaintiff, Board of Managers for Crotona Towers Condominium, initiated proceedings via an order to show cause. However, crucial initial filing requirements, including a complaint and proper service, were not fulfilled, leading to a motion by defendants to dismiss. The court determined that without proper commencement via a summons and complaint, personal jurisdiction over defendants was lacking, thereby granting the dismissal motion. This case underscores the procedural necessity of filing and serving required initial documents to establish a valid legal action.
479 Hicks St. Llc V. Rial
All Decisions
In a holdover-Non-primary residence case, landlord 479 Hicks St. LLC sought to remove tenant from an apartment, alleging she was not the primary resident. The court initially dismissed the action due to the landlord's failure to comply with statutory notice requirements under 9 NYCRR 2204.3, even after granting re-argument to correct procedural errors. This case underscores the importance of strict adherence to procedural rules in holdover proceedings, impacting a landlord's ability to maintain eviction actions based on non-primary residence without proper notice to regulatory authorities.
294 5th Ave. Realty Partners Llc V. Jimenez
294 5th Ave. Realty Partners Llc V. Jimenez
All Decisions
Landlord commenced a non-payment proceeding against a rent-controlled tenant. Tenant moved to dismiss based on rent-impairing violations and harassment. Court granted tenant's motion, finding rent-impairing violations existed for over a year, and landlord failed to correct them. The court granted a 100% rent abatement from October 2019 to June 2023 due to these violations. Court also found evidence of harassment based on landlord's repeated failure to correct the roof leak and imposed a $10,000 penalty. Landlord's prior squatter holdover proceedings were deemed not to constitute harassment.
439 West 125th Street Associates, Lp V. Noble
439 West 125th Street Associates, Lp V. Noble
All Decisions
Landlord commenced a nonpayment proceeding against the tenant. The tenant cross-moved to join the Department of Social Services (DSS) due to a pending CityFHEPS application. The court granted the tenant's motion to join DSS and adjourned the matter to allow DSS to update the court on the application status. The court also restored the case to the calendar and granted the landlord leave to amend the petition to include current arrears, but denied the landlord's motion for a final judgment.
Montera V. Kmr Amsterdam Llc
All Decisions
Tenant sued landlord for rent overcharges in a rent-stabilized apartment, alleging the landlord fraudulently deregulated the unit. The court denied both parties' summary judgment motions, finding factual issues regarding whether the landlord engaged in a fraudulent scheme to deregulate and whether the tenant can prove the elements of fraud. The court also dismissed certain of the landlord's affirmative defenses and counterclaims.
King George Apts Llc V. Barragan
King George Apts Llc V. Barragan
All Decisions
In this non-payment case, the court granted the tenant's motion for discovery related to his rent overcharge defense. The landlord's objection to discovery exceeding the four-year look-back period was overruled due to the history of unexplained rent increases and prior exemptions. The court emphasized the need for a broader discovery scope based on potential fraudulent deregulation, thereby allowing access to rental history before the tenant's lease began, consistent with updated Rent Stabilization Law and Code provisions.
Crotona Park Residences Llc V. Elicier
Crotona Park Residences Llc V. Elicier
All Decisions
In this case, the landlord sought to evict the tenant claiming that the tenant's occupancy as a licensee ended with the prior tenant's death. However, the court ruled that the tenant qualified for succession rights under the Rent Stabilization Code, emphasizing that the absence from income recertifications did not bar succession, thus dismissing the landlord's holdover petition.
5506-40 Linden Blvd Brooklyn Llc V. Linden 40 Llc
5506-40 Linden Blvd Brooklyn Llc V. Linden 40 Llc
All Decisions
In a dispute over misrepresented rental amounts in a property sale agreement, the landlord moved to dismiss the tenant's second amended complaint. The court clarified that misrepresentations about rental amounts did not constitute encumbrances, rejecting an expansive interpretation. With no relief available beyond the survival period in the sale agreement, the motion to dismiss was granted, establishing key legal points on encumbrances and res judicata.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Beltran, Elias (2024-05-08)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Beltran, Elias (2024-05-08)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Inglis V. Four Thirty Realty Llc
Inglis V. Four Thirty Realty Llc
All Decisions
In an overcharge action involving a building with J-51 tax benefits, tenants sought documents to determine the landlord's alleged fraudulent deregulation scheme. The court discussed common law exceptions to lookback rule and recent legislative changes, finding tenants demonstrating a colorable claim of fraud, entitling them to discovery. Key legal points include elements of fraud and legislative impact on landlord-tenant disputes.
Newport Gardens Apartment, L.P. V. Surles
Newport Gardens Apartment, L.P. V. Surles
All Decisions
The landlord commenced a nonpayment proceeding against the tenant, alleging rent arrears. The tenant moved to dismiss the petition, arguing that the predicate rent demand was defective for failing to clearly specify the alleged arrears period and including non-itemized, non-rent charges. The court agreed that the rent demand did not comply with statutory requirements and was too confusing to inform the tenant of the actual amount owed. As a result, the court granted the tenant's motion and dismissed the nonpayment petition without prejudice to the landlord re-filing with a proper rent demand. The court also ordered the landlord to correct …
Owl Creek Properties, Llc. V. Timmons
Owl Creek Properties, Llc. V. Timmons
All Decisions
In this holdover-non-primary residence case, the court determined that the tenant's brother, who resided in the premises since 2015, established succession rights despite the tenant's permanent vacatur. The court applied recent legislative amendments to define "permanent vacatur" and credited brother's testimony despite a lack of documentation. His continuous occupancy and credible testimony prevailed over the landlord's claims, resulting in the case being dismissed in favor of the tenant. The court held that the new statutory definition of permanent vacatur provided in RSC § 2523.5(b)(2) applies, and notes that this provision overrules the prior rule on determining permanent vacatur in the …