61 Jane Street Associates v. New York City Conciliation & Appeals Board
N.Y.
Citation analytics
How this case sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.
Frequently CitedTop 16% most-cited · cited by 25 decisions
25
Citing decisions
2
Courts citing
Citations by decade
7
13
3
1
1
1980s1990s2000s2010s2020s
Courts citing this case
Most recently cited by10
- 2021Portofino Realty Corp. v. New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal N.Y. App. Div.
- 2010Bondam Realty Associates, L.P. v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal N.Y. App. Div.
- 2006Mangano v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal N.Y. App. Div.
- 2001Miller v. Division of Housing & Community Renewal N.Y. App. Div.
- 2000Santo v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal N.Y. App. Div.
- 1999Flagg Court Realty Co. v. Holland N.Y. App. Div.
- 1998Derfner Management Co. v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal N.Y. App. Div.
- 1997Herman v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal N.Y. App. Div.
- 1995Dowarp Realty Co. v. State Division of Housing & Community Renewal N.Y. App. Div.
- 1995Gianelli v. Higgins N.Y. App. Div.
Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.
Opinion
In the Matter of 61 Jane Street Associates, Appellant, v New York City Conciliation and Appeals Board et al., Respondents.
Attorneys
- APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
- Richard F. Czaja for appellant.
- Cullen S. McVoy for respondents.
majority
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs. It cannot be said that the determination of lawful rent was either arbitrary or capricious, or that the remedy imposed was disproportionate under the circumstances.
Concur: Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Simons, Kaye and Titone. Taking no part: Judge Alexander.