A Few Of Our Cases




Missionary Sisters, Inc. v. Vivien Faurebach Civil Court New York County, Index No. 50074/2014. 

In this holdover based upon non-primary residency, an elderly tenant who spent time obtaining medical treatment in Saratoga Springs, provided discovery documents to the Owner’s attorney while she was pro se.  After retaining Grimble & LoGuidice, LLC, the court, by the Honorable Cheryl J. Gonzales, JHC, issued an order finding that the attorney for the Owner had “engaged in improper discovery,” and the Court denied the Owner’s request for further discovery and ordered that, “… the firm of Kucker & Bruh, LLP is disqualified from representing the Petitioner in this proceeding.”


1549 LLC v. Erick Mendoza, Civil Court, Kings County, Index No. 012472/14 (July 7, 2014).

In a superintendent holdover where the superintendent claimed age discrimination and Labor Law violations, the superintendent was granted a stay of the proceeding pending the determination of his Human Rights and Labor Law complaints.  The Court by the Honorable Steven Weissman, JHC, found that the Owner, an LLC entity, could not separate itself from the management company, Chestnut Holdings of New York Inc., as to its defense that it had less than four employees and was thus exempt from an age discrimination complaint.  “…it is the belief of this Court that petitioner cannot separate itself from Chestnut Holdings of New York, Inv., …and it is clear that Chestnut Holdings has well more than four employees.  The court further denied the Owner’s application for use and occupancy as having no basis.


Extell Belnord LLC v Uppman, 113 A.D.3d 1 (AD1, 2013)

A successor tenant challenged an unorthodox agreement whereby in 2006, Extell and the Tenants Association, the Belnord Conservancy, agreed to waive the rent regulated tenants’ rights to the protections of the rent regulatory statutes.  A unanimous decision by the Appellate Division, First Department, reversed the decision of a Supreme Court and determined that “…public policy in the realm of rent regulation is strong and clear.  Parties simply may not agree to ignore the rent laws, even for the most noble of purposes.”  The Agreement was determined to be void ab initio.

Read more: http://therealdeal.com/blog/2013/11/22/appeals-court-voids-extells-belnord-tenant-deal/



Schanzer v. Vendome, 7 Misc 3d 1018A (2005)  

In this Civil Court proceeding, an order issued allowing the tenant to bring the Department of Buildings into an HP proceeding to have serious DOB violations corrected.


42-44 West 74th Street, LLC v. Savior. NewYork Law Journal 9/29/05

Succeeded in having the landlord’s law firm disqualified because they had represented the tenant in another matter, creating a conflict of interest.


Riverton v. Knibb, 2005 NYSlipOp 25552 (2005)

This decision is available online (http://www.courts.state.ny.us/Reporter/3dseries/2005/2005_25552.htm), and is notable in that it reversed a controversial decision that was the subject of a front page article in the New York Law Journal. The tenant asserted succession rights, claiming that she was living in the apartment with her grandmother at the time of her death.  The landlord opposed the succession rights because the tenant had signed her deceased grandmother’s name on a renewal lease.  The trial court agreed with the landlord.  When the tenant came to our firm, we obtained a reversal in the Appellate Term.


Cassorla v. Foster, 2 Misc. 3d 65 (2004)

After winning a long trial where the architect landlord claimed that his building was exempt from rent stabilization because of a “substantial rehabilitation,” we prevailed against the landlord’s appeal.


318 East 93, LLC v. Ward, 276 AD2d 277 (2000)

Successfully defended, in Civil Court and in two appeals, a senior citizen from eviction based upon the claim that her apartment was so cluttered that she could not possibly live there.


Grassini v. Paravalos, 270 AD2d 52 (2000)

Successfully asserted, in Supreme Court and on appeal, a tenant’s claim to rent stabilized status after the tenant was displaced due to a fire.


Stowe v. 19 East 88th Street, Inc., 257 AD2d 355 (1999)

Prevailed against a cooperative corporation that was refusing to permit the transfer of an apartment to the next of kin of a deceased shareholder.


77 Avenue D Associates, Inc. v. DHCR, 249 AD2d 113 (1998)

In this Article 78 proceeding brought by a landlord, we successfully intervened on behalf of the tenants to have a rent overcharge award by the DHCR upheld.


Hudson v. Benoit, 226 AD2d 196 (1996)

Defended an appeal by a landlord after having the landlord’s eviction case thrown out of the Civil Court.


227 East 57th Street Associates v. DHCR and Beardsall, 214 AD2d 327 (1995)

Successfully intervened in an Article 78 proceeding upholding a rent reduction for a tenant, and defended the landlord’s appeal.


Lipkis v. Gilmour, 160 Misc 2d 50 (1994)

After the landlord of a loft building brought a non-payment eviction case, the tenant raised a defense that the landlord had not complied with the loft law.  That defense was stricken by the Civil Court, but was reversed by the Appellate Term.


Various Tenants of 446-448 West 167th Street v. NYC Department of HPD, 153 Misc 2d 221 (1992)  

In a case brought by tenants in a city owned building against the City of New York to obtain repairs, the City was held in contempt of court for failing to comply with a court order requiring those repairs to be done.  The City appealed, but lost in the Appellate Term, and the tenants were permitted to go ahead on their claims for damages and legal fees.


Artis v. City of New York, 133 Misc 2d 629 (1986)

Tenants were successful in having a 7A administrator appointed to run a building that had been mismanaged by the City of New York.


Kace Realty Co. v. Levy, 130 Misc. 2d 858 (1986)

Successfully defended a non-primary residence case in the Civil Court and on appeal based upon the landlord’s non compliance with the Rent Stabilization Law.


Toribio v. Whiz Realty Corp. 131 Misc 2d 227 (1986)

After the tenants of a run down building were successful in having a 7A administrator appointed to run the building, a new owner purchased it.  That new owner sought to take the building back from the tenants, but was barred from doing so based upon Bob’s demonstration that the new landlord could not show financial ability nor a detailed plan to put the building back into proper repair.


Melevoi v. Yang, 120 Misc 2d 982 (1983)  

Succeeded in having non-payment cases against a group of tenants dismissed because of the landlord’s failure to comply with the rent regulatory laws.


Photograph by Tony Notarberardino.