Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002

Anderson v. Lynch

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided March 25, 2002

292 A.D.2d 603; 739 N.Y.S.2d 622; 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3250

Cases that cite this one

7 later published cases cite this decision.

Watson v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
Watson v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
Gomez v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2010)
Jenkins v. Fieldbridge Associates, LLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)
Ador Realty, LLC v. Division of Housing & Community Renewal (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
Cecilia v. Irizarry (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2002)
Sadler v. Lynch (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2002)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, dated November 3, 1999, which revoked a determination of the District Rent Administrator, dated November 27, 1995, awarding the petitioner a rent overcharge and refund, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dabiri, J.), dated September 27, 2000, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

*604The Supreme Court properly determined that the respondent correctly refused to consider the rent history of the appellant’s rent-stabilized apartment beyond the four-year period measured from the appellant’s filing of his rent overcharge complaint (see Myers v Frankel, 292 AD2d 575 [decided herewith]; Silver v Lynch, 283 AD2d 213; Matter of Sessler v New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 282 AD2d 262).

The appellant’s remaining contention is without merit. Prudenti, P.J., Santucci, S. Miller and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.