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 1261 - 1290 of 13109
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Matter Of 128 Second Realty Llc V. New York State Div. Of Hous. & Community Renewal
Matter Of 128 Second Realty Llc V. New York State Div. Of Hous. & Community Renewal
All Decisions
A landlord challenged the rent restoration date set by the DHCR for an apartment previously deemed uninhabitable due to a fire. The court upheld the DHCR's decision, finding the restoration date rational and supported by evidence, rejecting the landlord's arguments for an earlier date submitted after the DHCR order. Key Legal Points: 1) Rent restoration for previously uninhabitable rent-stabilized apartments requires DHCR confirmation of habitability. 2) Landlords must submit complete applications and cannot introduce new evidence after the DHCR order. 3) Courts defer to DHCR decisions with a rational basis.
Emeagwali V. Burgos
All Decisions
In a holdover proceeding after lease expiration, the tenant facing eviction due to non-payment and holdover was granted a temporary stay of eviction. The court considered the tenant's hardship, including the recent death of a child, while acknowledging the landlord's financial burden. This case highlights that even in holdover cases, courts weigh hardships of both parties when issuing eviction stays.
Jemrock Realty Co., Llc V. Sternberg
Jemrock Realty Co., Llc V. Sternberg
All Decisions
Landlord sued tenants (son and daughter-in-law of deceased tenant) claiming they didn't qualify for succession due to frequent absences from the apartment. Court denied landlord's motion for summary judgment, finding issues of fact regarding primary residence and excusable absences require a trial. Additionally, the younger tenant didn't qualify for the senior citizen co-occupancy exception. Key points: 1) Tenants seeking succession must prove primary residence. 2) Temporary absences may be excusable. 3) "Disabled person" exception requires proof of major life activity limitation. 4) Senior citizen co-occupancy only applies to tenants 62 or older at the original tenant's death.
Rosebud Owner Llc V. Sang Tan Park
Rosebud Owner Llc V. Sang Tan Park
All Decisions
Tenant voluntarily vacated during a nonpayment proceeding, but the court awarded the landlord a $45,000 judgment for unpaid rent. Key points: 1) Tenant vacating doesn't prevent rent judgment. 2) Personal service not required for judgment against appearing tenant.
251 W. 74 Owners Corp. V. New York State Div. Of Hous. & Community Renewal
251 W. 74 Owners Corp. V. New York State Div. Of Hous. & Community Renewal
All Decisions
Landlord's Article 78 challenge granted. Rent-stabilized tenants filed a complaint with DHCR seeking a rent reduction due to inoperable laundry facilities. DHCR issued a rent reduction order naming the building owner as the respondent, even though the tenants rented from a shareholder and not the building owner. The court found that DHCR violated due process by not naming and serving the shareholder, vacating the rent reduction order. Key legal points: due process requires parties with an interest in an administrative proceeding be named and served, and the definition of "owner" under the Rent Stabilization Law may differ from other contexts.
Lesmha Lp V. Vasquez
All Decisions
The landlord commenced a holdover proceeding against the tenant for failure to renew a rent-stabilized lease. The court dismissed the petition, finding the premises were not subject to rent stabilization based on regulatory agreements requiring income-based rents set by DHCR, not RGB orders. The tenant's counterclaim for rent overcharge was also dismissed as rent stabilization was inapplicable. While the tenant had renewed prior leases on rent-stabilized forms, the parties cannot agree to rent regulatory status contrary to the statutory criteria. The court declined to apply collateral estoppel from prior proceedings due to lack of documentation establishing identity of issues.
Dahl V. Prince Holdings 2012, Llc
Dahl V. Prince Holdings 2012, Llc
All Decisions
Plaintiffs, tenants in a rent-stabilized building, alleged harassment and neglect by the landlord and others to force them out. The court denied summary judgment for most claims, including constructive eviction, trespass, nuisance, and harassment, against Prince Holdings and others, indicating factual disputes requiring trial. However, it dismissed certain claims for actual eviction and granted partial summary judgment for tenant Dahl on damages for actual eviction, and for trespass damages against Prince Holdings. Landlord's counterclaims for unpaid rent were denied pending resolution of habitability defenses.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Wright, Thomas (2022-08-04)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Wright, Thomas (2022-08-04)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Elkady, Sherif (2023-05-02)
Decision In Art. 78 Proceeding - Elkady, Sherif (2023-05-02)
Decisions in Art. 78 Proceedings
No abstract provided.
Virgav. Virga
All Decisions
Landlord brought a licensee eviction proceeding against her son and his girlfriend, claiming they were no longer welcome after she transferred ownership of the property while retaining a life estate. Tenant argued a "family exception" barred the eviction and sought to dismiss the case. The court rejected this argument, finding no such exception for adult children and that the landlord, as a life estate holder, had the right to exclude occupants. The court denied the tenant's motion to dismiss but allowed them to file an answer raising defenses.
Bravo V. Hull Ave. Apts Llc
All Decisions
The court found the landlord illegally locked out the rent-stabilized tenant from her apartment after she visited her mother. The tenant credibly testified she had a lease, left belongings, and did not surrender keys. The landlord failed to prove surrender of possession. However, the court dismissed against the new tenant who legally obtained the apartment through HRA after the lockout. The court awarded a final judgment of possession to the tenant against the landlord but permanently stayed issuance of a warrant of eviction against the new tenant.
Diego Beekman Mutual Housing Association Housing Development Fund Corp. V. Hammond
Diego Beekman Mutual Housing Association Housing Development Fund Corp. V. Hammond
All Decisions
In this non-payment proceeding, the court granted the tenant's motion seeking an order for the petitioner to correct a class "C" violation due to roach infestation in the subject apartment. Despite the petitioner's opposition, the court found the respondent's evidence credible and unrefuted, establishing the existence of a severe roach infestation. The court ordered the petitioner to abate the violation within 21 days and comply with all relevant laws and codes. The respondent was directed to provide reasonable access for the correction process, and default could lead to further legal actions, including contempt or civil penalties.
West 92nd Assoc. Llc V. Hussein
West 92nd Assoc. Llc V. Hussein
All Decisions
In this case, a landlord initiated a holdover proceeding against the tenant for failure to sign a renewal lease in a rent-stabilized apartment. The tenant argued that there was no initial rent-stabilized lease to renew and that the landlord failed to provide a proper lease offer with required riders explaining the tenant's rights under the Rent Stabilization Law. The court found that the landlord's notice contained a material misstatement about the lease expiration date and that the landlord failed to comply with DHCR requirements for lease renewal offers. The court dismissed the landlord's motion for summary judgment, granted the tenant's …
1691 Fulton Ave. Assoc., L.P. V. Washington
1691 Fulton Ave. Assoc., L.P. V. Washington
All Decisions
Tenant successfully amended their answer claiming late service of the petition by the landlord, which the court found constituted prejudice and grounds for dismissal. The court emphasized strict adherence to service timelines and rejected the landlord's attempts to retroactively fix the service date or collect use and occupancy due to adjournments agreed upon by both parties.
109th Affordable Housing Llc V. Matthew Beck
109th Affordable Housing Llc V. Matthew Beck
All Decisions
In a non-payment proceeding against a month-to-month tenant, the court ruled that RPAPL 711(2) cannot be used for rent not paid after the end of any given month, as each month constitutes a separate term. This decision was based on RPAPL 711(2)'s requirement for a written agreement, RPL § 232-c's definition of month-to-month tenancies, and supporting case law. While the tenant raised other defenses, the court dismissed the case based on this interpretation of RPAPL 711(2).
Matter Of 5523 Wash. Ave & St. James Brooklyn Llc V. New York State Div. Of Hous. & Community Renewal
All Decisions
In a holdover-non-primary residence case before the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Kings County, the landlord sought Article 78 exemption from rent stabilization laws based on substantial rehabilitation of a housing complex. The court found that the administrative agency's determinations were arbitrary and capricious, lacking a rational basis in law and fact. The court vacated the orders of the Rent Administrator and Deputy Commissioner and remanded the proceeding for further consideration of landlord's application for deregulation based on substantial rehabilitation.
Aspenly Co., Llc V. New York State Div. Of Hous. & Community Renewal
Aspenly Co., Llc V. New York State Div. Of Hous. & Community Renewal
All Decisions
Landlord challenged a determination by DHCR denying its application for Major Capital Improvement (MCI) rent increases. HSTPA prohibited MCI rent increases for buildings with 35% or fewer rent-regulated units. Petitioner's building contained 35% or fewer rent-regulated units, making it ineligible for MCI rent increases under HSTPA. Court ruled in favor of DHCR, finding that HSTPA did not have a retroactive effect because it only affected the propriety of a prospective rent increase. Court also rejected petitioner's constitutional arguments, citing Court of Appeals decision in Regina Metropolitan Co. LLC v. New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, which held …
William 165 Llc V. New York City Dept. Of Hous. Preserv. & Dev.
William 165 Llc V. New York City Dept. Of Hous. Preserv. & Dev.
All Decisions
Landlord sought a reversal of HPD's decision to include its building in the CONH Pilot Program and a waiver from the program. Court found HPD's decision rational and denied landlord's requests. Key Legal Points: 1) Timeliness of challenge determined by actual notice, not publication date. 2) HPD's interpretation of program criteria was reasonable. 3) No due process violation in placement on list without prior hearing. 4) Waiver request unripe without pursuing necessary steps within program.
71st St. Props. Llc V. New York State Div. Of Hous. & Community Renewal
71st St. Props. Llc V. New York State Div. Of Hous. & Community Renewal
All Decisions
Landlord sought to compel DHCR to issue a decision on their eviction application for demolition under Rent Stabilization Code §2524.5(a)(2). The court denied the petition, finding DHCR's decision on eviction for demolition discretionary and entitled to deference in its resource allocation and decision-making process (CPLR §7803(1); Matter of 81 Warren St. Realty Corp. v New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 2008 NY Slip Op 31030[U]). While acknowledging the delay, the court found DHCR was actively processing the application and declined to impose a timeframe (Audubon Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 148 Misc …
West Pierre Assoc. Llc V. Harvey
West Pierre Assoc. Llc V. Harvey
All Decisions
Landlord appealed from an order of the Civil Court dismissing tenant's rent overcharge defense and counterclaim in a nonpayment summary proceeding. The Appellate Term affirmed, holding that the HSTPA does not apply retroactively to overcharges alleged to have occurred before its enactment in 2019, and that the pre-HSTPA law's four-year statute of limitations and four-year lookback rule precluded the tenant's claim. Key Legal Points: (1) The HSTPA cannot be applied retroactively to rent overcharges that occurred before its enactment in 2019; (2) The pre-HSTPA law's four-year statute of limitations and four-year lookback rule preclude examination of an apartment's rental history …
2 No. 6th Pl. Property Owner Llc V. Golriz
2 No. 6th Pl. Property Owner Llc V. Golriz
All Decisions
In a non-payment proceeding, the court ruled that the landlord's offer of a renewal lease during a holdover proceeding did not create a new tenancy but settled pending litigation. The court distinguished relevant laws and held that the landlord was obligated to offer a renewal lease, and by offering it during litigation, did not voluntarily create a new tenancy. Respondent's argument that a new tenancy was created was denied.
Roper V. New York City Department Of Housing Preservation And Development
Roper V. New York City Department Of Housing Preservation And Development
All Decisions
Tenant sought succession rights to a Mitchell-Lama apartment after the death of the tenant of record, who she claimed was her grandmother-in-law (non-traditional familial relationship case). Landlord denied the claim, stating tenant failed to provide sufficient evidence of a financial and emotional commitment and interdependence with the tenant of record. Court remanded the case to landlord for further consideration, finding that the Hearing Officer did not adequately consider all relevant factors and evidence. Key Legal Points: Need to carefully consider all enumerated factors in succession regulations and provide applicants with a fair opportunity to present their case.
360-362 Lafayette, Llc V. Brown
360-362 Lafayette, Llc V. Brown
All Decisions
Tenant brought a non-payment proceeding challenging the regulatory status of the apartment, alleging it was part of a horizontal multiple dwelling and therefore rent-stabilized. Landlord claimed it was a four-family house and not subject to rent stabilization. Court granted tenant's motion for discovery to allow inspection of the buildings to gather evidence about shared facilities, but denied requests for copies of leases and a deposition of landlord. Key Legal Points: Court found inspection necessary to determine if buildings shared enough common facilities to be considered a horizontal multiple dwelling.
71 Wash. Place Owners, Inc. V. Resnicow
71 Wash. Place Owners, Inc. V. Resnicow
All Decisions
The court reached three decisions in this case. 2/3. Landlord brought an ejectment action against tenant for nuisance. Tenant moved to suppress certain audio recordings of tenant's loud arguments, which were made by fellow tenants in public areas of the building. The court denied tenant's motion to suppress, finding that the recordings were "freely overheard" and thus did not violate tenant's reasonable expectation of privacy. Key Legal Points: (1) A person who speaks in a tone audible to a person outside his door does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy; (2) There is no meaningful difference between recording sounds …
71 Washington Place Owners, Inc. V. Resnicow
71 Washington Place Owners, Inc. V. Resnicow
All Decisions
The court reached three decisions in this case. 3/3. The landlord sought to evict the tenant due to repeated instances of objectionable conduct, including verbally assaulting other shareholders and staff, trespassing, and engaging in disruptive behavior. The court ruled in favor of the landlord, finding that the decision to terminate the lease was protected by the business judgment rule and that the tenant failed to demonstrate bad faith or discrimination on the part of the landlord. Key Legal Points: Courts will generally defer to decisions made by boards of directors in business settings; shareholders have a right to expect reasonable …
Hph Milano, Llc V. Iakouchevitch
Hph Milano, Llc V. Iakouchevitch
All Decisions
The landlord sued the tenant in a holdover summary proceeding, seeking to evict them for alleged nuisance. The tenant argued improper service, discrepancies in the termination notice, and waiver due to accepted rent payments. The court ruled in favor of the landlord, finding the service valid, the notice specific enough, and the accepted rent not a waiver. Key legal points included the process server's affidavits serving as prima facie evidence of service, tenant needing sworn statements to rebut, and the notice of termination meeting Rent Stabilization Code requirements.
Sea Park East Lp V. Beltran
All Decisions
In this non-payment case, the landlord sought to amend the petition while the tenant raised a cross-motion to dismiss the proceeding, citing payment in satisfaction of the arrears. The court analyzed the application of rent payments when not earmarked and found that absent an agreement to the contrary, payments should be applied to the oldest outstanding amount due to avoid unjust results. Relying on precedent, the court concluded that the tenant had satisfied the petition based on the ledger provided by the landlord. Consequently, the court dismissed the case without prejudice to any post-petition arrears. Key legal points include the …
Department Of Hous. Preserv. & Dev. Of City Of N.Y. V. 1515 St. Johns Place
Department Of Hous. Preserv. & Dev. Of City Of N.Y. V. 1515 St. Johns Place
All Decisions
In this HP proceeding, Appellate court upheld lower court's decision awarding $275,000 in penalties to DHPD against landlord for failing to provide hot water, violating Housing Maintenance Code. Key legal points include the court's affirmation that civil penalties serve a remedial purpose to coerce landlords to comply with housing maintenance standards, rather than being punitive, and the rejection of the defendant's argument invoking the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment.
Matter Of Williams V. New York City Hous. Auth.
Matter Of Williams V. New York City Hous. Auth.
All Decisions
The Appellate Division upheld the NYCHA Hearing Officer's denial of petitioner's application to vacate a default judgment for chronic rent delinquency and failure to verify income. The tenant failed to convince the court he had a valid reason for missing the hearing or a strong defense to the underlying charges. This case highlights key legal points: 1) Tenants in eviction proceedings must attend hearings or present valid excuses for absence; 2) Default judgments stand if tenants lack justification for non-appearance and weak defenses; and 3) Courts can lift stays on eviction proceedings when initial rulings are grounded in reason. This …
Skipp To My Lilly, Llc V. Bonner
Skipp To My Lilly, Llc V. Bonner
All Decisions
In this holdover-nuisance case, the tenant sought dismissal of the proceeding, arguing that the landlord's acceptance of rent during the "window period" vitiated the termination notice. The court determined the "window period" to be from February 1, 2023, to May 22, 2023, based on service of the petition and notice of petition. Despite the landlord's reliance on specific cases regarding waiver, the court found that the acceptance of rent during the established window period vitiated the termination notice, leading to the dismissal of the petition without prejudice. Key legal points include the distinction between vitiation of termination notice and waiver, …