Building Substantially Rehabbed Was Exempt from Stabilization

September 21, 2014

LVT Number: #25725

Landlord sued to evict an unregulated tenant. Tenant claimed that he was subject to rent stabilization. The trial court ruled for landlord. Tenant appealed and lost. Landlord showed that prior landlord substantially rehabilitated the building after Jan. 1, 1974, spending over $319,000 to convert the class "B" SRO building into a class "A" multiple dwelling. Prior landlord received J-51 tax abatement benefits for the work, but tenant moved into the building long after the J-51 benefits had expired.

Landlord sued to evict an unregulated tenant. Tenant claimed that he was subject to rent stabilization. The trial court ruled for landlord. Tenant appealed and lost. Landlord showed that prior landlord substantially rehabilitated the building after Jan. 1, 1974, spending over $319,000 to convert the class "B" SRO building into a class "A" multiple dwelling. Prior landlord received J-51 tax abatement benefits for the work, but tenant moved into the building long after the J-51 benefits had expired. The trial court properly determined that the building wasn't subject to rent stabilization and that the proceeding wasn't a pretext for discrimination.

Brownstone Partners, LP v. Slupinski: 44 Misc.3d 134(A), 2014 Y Slip Op 51199(U) (App. T. 1 Dept.; 8/8/14; Schoenfeld, JP, Shulman, Ling-Cohan, JJ)

Topics

More like this