Adam Leitman Bailey Articles

Adam Leitman Bailey Articles

An online resource of real estate law articles

  • Home
  • Real Estate Q & A

Overcoming Extremely Difficult Odds, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Defeats Agency Governing Rent Deregulation, DHCR, Protecting Default Order of High-Income High-Rent Deregulation, Deregulating Apartment

  • Vladimir Mironenko

This case highlights the mantra of never-ever giving up, believing in the case, and continuing to fight for our client’s rights to deregulate a rent stabilized apartment despite five years of delays and obstacles in multiple courts and agency proceedings. Finally, at the State Supreme Court, justice prevailed for our landlord-client who never stopped believing in Adam Leitman Bailey P.C.

After a five-year battle in multiple courts and at the Division of Housing & Community Renewal (DHCR), Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. won a CPLR Article 78 proceeding, and obtained reinstatement of a 2013 DHCR order on default, which deregulated a rent stabilized apartment in a 2009 high-income, high-rent deregulation proceeding.

In 2009, the tenant failed to respond to the then owner’s DHCR petition for high-income high-rent deregulation of the rent stabilized apartment, located in a converted condominium building. In 2013, DHCR issued an order deregulating the apartment based on the tenant’s default in answering the petition. After offering the tenant a free market lease, which she refused, the then owner filed a holdover proceeding.

In 2015, two years after DHCR issued the deregulation order, the tenant filed a petition for administrative review (PAR), challenging the order. By that time, our client owned the apartment. We opposed the PAR arguing that the deadline to file is 35 days from the date of the order and that the law prevents DHCR from accepting for filing a late PAR. DHCR agreed and denied the tenant’s PAR.

We moved for and won summary judgment in the eviction proceeding and substituted the current owner into the case.

The tenant, represented by counsel, filed an Article 78 petition challenging DHCR’s rejection of her PAR. The tenant claimed that her income was always below the deregulation threshold and that her default in answering the deregulation petition should be excused because she was unable to timely respond to DHCR due to alleged psychological issues. Because tenant’s income may not have exceeded the required deregulation threshold ($175,000.00 per year in two consecutive years), it was crucial that the tenant’s default not be disturbed, since a review on the merits could sink any chances of deregulation. This stacked the odds against our client. Sympathizing with the tenant, and in a complete about face, DHCR appeared and cross-moved to remand the proceeding back to itself for a new determination. We opposed both applications. Concerning the tenant, we argued that her alleged excuse was fabricated after we located and demonstrated that she authored over 500 articles for a major newspaper during the time she claimed to lack the ability to submit an answer in the DHCR proceeding. We also argued that there was no basis for a remand, that DHCR’s initial determination was the correct one, and that remand would be futile because there is no basis to accept a late PAR. Over our opposition, a Supreme Court judge remanded the proceeding back to DHCR in 2016 on an “expedited basis.”

We sent multiple letters to DHCR requesting that it process the case. It did not. We then filed a new proceeding in Supreme Court seeking a writ of mandamus against DHCR to compel it to render a decision. DHCR agreed to issue a decision within 75 days.

Without any legitimate authority to do so, DHCR then revoked its own prior deregulation order and accepted for filing tenant’s PAR application. We filed an Article 78 proceeding. DHCR argued that we must first exhaust our administrative remedies by waiting for DHCR to rule on the PAR. We resolved the case reserving all rights and arguments until DHCR’s final determination.

In 2019, by order pursuant to remand, DHCR granted the tenant’s PAR and denied the underlying high-income high-rent deregulation proceeding. To exhaust all administrative remedies before returning to court, we immediately filed a PAR, which DHCR denied in 2020 without citing to any authority allowing the acceptance of the tenant’s untimely PAR.

We then commenced the Article 78 proceeding and argued that DHCR’s about face in accepting tenant’s late PAR was arbitrary and capricious and prohibited by applicable law. We researched and cited to applicable statutes and appellate court authority supporting our arguments, and cited DHCR’s own cases where DHCR argued (in other matters) that the late filing of a PAR is fatal.

The court agreed with our arguments, granted our Article 78 petition, found DHCR’s actions to be arbitrary and capricious, refused to remand the proceeding to DHCR again (given the tortured history of the proceedings), ordered that the original order of deregulation be reinstated, and declared the apartment to be decontrolled.

Vladimir Mironenko, partner in Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s Landlord-Tenant and Litigation Departments represented the owner-landlord.

Tags: Division of Housing and Community Renewal Landlord (DHCR), Landlord Representation, real estate litigation

ARTICLES BY TOPIC

  • Appellate Litigation
  • Buyouts and Sale of Apartment Lease
  • Commercial Landlord Representation
  • Commercial Leasing Services
  • Commercial Tenant Representation
  • Condominium & Cooperative Board & Building Representation
  • Condominium & Cooperative Litigation
  • Condominium & Cooperative Owner & Shareholder Representation
  • Condominium & Cooperative Representation
  • Condominium/Board of Managers Representation of Newly Constructed Buildings & Conversions
  • Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR)
  • Fire and Building Violations
  • Foreclosure Litigation Group
  • Homeowner and Tenant Associations
  • Insurance Defense Litigation
  • Landlord Representation
  • About Mitchell-Lama/ Housing Development Fund Corporation (HDFC) & Third Party Transfer Representation
  • Mortgage Finance Practice Group
  • Purchase & Sale of Homes
  • Purchase and Sale of Multi-Family Dwellings and Buildings
  • Real Estate Administrative Proceedings/Environmental Control Board
  • Real Estate Litigation
  • Tenant Representation
  • Q & A
  • Title Insurance Claims Group

RECENT POSTS

  • How To Run a Board Meeting
  • Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Settlement Negotiations Save NYC Owner Hundreds of Thousands of Dollars in Rent Overcharge Class Action Case
  • Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Achieves Favorable Settlement of Construction Defects Claims Against a Sponsor
  • Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Defeats Order to Show Cause Seeking to Stay Housing Court Eviction Proceeding
  • Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Revives Judgment Resulting in Clients Recovering Over $2.5 Million from Former Friend

TOP CONTRIBUTORS

Adam Leitman Bailey

Dov Treiman

John Desiderio
  • Popular
  • Comments
  • Tags
  • FDA’s Poison Prevention Packaging Rule: A Bitter Pill the FDA is Forced to Swallow
  • The New Rules of Seeking a Buyout of a Rent-Regulated Tenant
  • Rules Governing Anticipatory Repudiation of Contracts
  • New Rules of Substantial Rehabilitation to Remove Units from Rent Regulation Part II
  • Building Sold Before Violation Notice Issued
  • Public Health and Law : Assignment Essays | Assignment Essays: […] FDA’s Poison Prevention Packaging ...
  • Public Health and Law : Solution Essays - Solution Essays: […] FDA’s Poison Prevention Packaging ...
  • Who are the parties in the case and what are their respective interests? - Excelwriters: […] FDA’s Poison Prevention Packaging ...
  • Nutritional Health Alliance v. Food and Drug Administration - Longbeach Writers: […] FDA’s Poison Prevention Packaging ...
  • Public health and law | Law homework help – Hero Papers: […] FDA’s Poison Prevention Packaging ...
Adam Bailey Adam Leitman Adam Leitman Bailey apartment rent Appellate Division Case Co-op board member rights Co-op issues commercial landlord commercial lease commercial tenant condominium Condominium Board contract cooperative board court of appeals Dov Treiman eviction foreclosure Foreclosure law foreclosure litigation group Home purchase Insurance John Desiderio landlord Landlord and tenant landlord law Landlord Representation Lease Lease Provision License Agreement Mortgage nonprimary residence NY state law property owner property sale Real estate real estate litigation rent Rent stabilization rent stabilized RPAPL tenant law tenant rights violation notice

Read more from Adam Leitman Bailey

Huffington Post

The Cooperator

Apartment Law Insider

Commercial Observer

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.

Twitter Twitter

Follow @alb_pc on Twitter

Twitter Twitter

Follow @Aleitmanbailey on Twitter

LinkedIn

Adam Leitman Bailey on LinkedIn

Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. on LinkedIn

Adam Leitman Bailey Articles © 2023. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by WordPress. Designed by Woo Themes