Matter of Yonkers Gardens Co. v. State of New York Div. of Hous. & Cmty. Renewal
Cases that cite this one
17 later published cases cite this decision.
- People v. Cuttita (New York Supreme Court 2003)
- Matter of Barberan v. Town of Eastchester (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2025)
- Matter of HYK-273 W. 138th St. LLC v. New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
- Calenzo v. Shah (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Calenzo v. Shah (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Jno-Charles v. New York City Housing Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
- Jno-Charles v. New York City Housing Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
- Peckham v. Calogero (N.Y. 2009)
- Peckham v. Calogero (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2008)
- 374 Eastern Parkway Conmar Owners Corp. v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2002)
- Muller v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2000)
- Sichel v. Aponte (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1994)
- Mott v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1993)
- City of Schenectady v. New York State Public Employment Relations Board (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1987)
- Aldrich v. Pattison (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1985)
- County of Nassau v. State of New York Public Employment Relations Board (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1984)
- North Ridge Enterprises, Inc. v. Town of Westfield (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1982)
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
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
Determination appealed from and order of the Appellate Division brought up for review affirmed, with costs. Petitioner failed to raise before the Division of Housing and Community Renewal the issues he now argues on appeal. These arguments concerning the receipts included in petitioner’s income by the division for purposes of computing a hardship rental increase under the Emergency Tenant Protection Act of 1974 (L 1974, ch 576), and the division’s calculation of such an increase, may not be raised for the first time before the courts in an article 78 proceeding (see Matter of Tipon v Appeals Bd. of Dept. of Motor Vehicles, *968 52 AD2d 1065; Matter of Lewis v Village Bd. of Trustees of Vil. of Scotia, 48 AD2d 952; cf. Matter of Levine v New York State Liq. Auth., 23 NY2d 863).
Determination affirmed, etc.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.