Disabled Shareholder-Tenant Needed More Time to Make Apartment Alterations

Shareholder-tenant filed a complaint against  landlord cooperative corporation with the New York State Division of Human Rights (DHR) for discrimination. Tenant claimed that landlord should have given her an accommodation from its rule requiring that, before any alterations to an apartment could be made, tenant must execute an alteration agreement providing that the work would be completed within 90 days or else tenant had to pay financial penalties. Before filing her complaint, tenant gave landlord a detailed letter from her doctor stating that tenant suffered from ADHD and a sleep disorder that prevented her from being able to complete tasks within strict time constraints. While not disputing that tenant had a disability, the DHR dismissed the complaint, finding no probable cause to believe that landlord had engaged in an unlawful discriminatory practice. Tenant then filed an Article 78 appeal, claiming that DHR’s decision was arbitrary and capricious.

The court ruled for tenant, and the appeals court ruled against DHR. DHR’s finding that tenant refused to agree to any time limitation and that the renovations had been ongoing since 2003 wasn’t supported by the record. Tenant had requested three 90-day periods to complete the work, but landlord rejected that request and offered no accommodation at all. Landlord also offered no proof to rebut tenant’s claim that any remaining work was nonstructural and wouldn’t disturb other tenants. So there was probable cause to believe that landlord had engaged in unlawful discrimination. And the business judgment rule doesn’t protect a discriminatory decision. The case was sent back to DHR for further review.

Steinberg-Fisher v. North Shore Towers Apts., Inc.: Index No. 7466/14, 2017 NY Slip Op 02799 (App. Div. 2 Dept.; Dillon, JP, Roman, Hinds-Radix, Duffy, JJ)