DHCR Must Decide If Repeal of Deregulation Law Applied to Tenant's Case

Landlord applied for high-rent/high-income deregulation of tenant's rent-stabilized apartment after the building's J-51 tax benefits ended. Tenants argued that the building became rent stabilized solely as a result of its participation in the J-51 tax program, so the apartment wasn't subject to high-rent/high-income deregulation when J-51 benefits expired. The DRA ruled for tenants and dismissed landlord's application.

Landlord appealed and won. The DHCR agreed with landlord that the apartment became rent stabilized when prior, rent-controlled, tenant moved out and that the apartment therefore was subject to high-rent/high-income deregulation when J-51 benefits ended in June 2010. The DHCR sent the case back to the DRA to decide whether the apartment qualified for deregulation based on tenants' income. Tenants filed an Article 78 appeal of the DHCR's decision, which the court dismissed. First, the DHCR's decision to remand the case to the DRA wasn't a final administrative determination. So, an Article 78 appeal was premature. Second, if the repeal of high-rent/high-income deregulation generally by the Housing Stability and Tenant Protection Act of 2019 (HSTPA) applied, that was for the DHCR to decide, not the court.

Goldfeder v. DHCR: Index No. 153205/19, 2019 NY Slip Op 32841(U) (Sup. Ct. NY; 9/25/19; Edmead, J)