New Backflow Preventer Doesn't Qualify

April 30, 1994

LVT Number: 8791

Landlord applied for MCI hikes based on the installation of a backflow preventer and laundry room renovations. The DHCR ruled against landlord, and landlord appealed. The Westchester court ruled for landlord, and the DHCR then appealed. The appeals court ruled for the DHCR. The DHCR's ruling that denied landlord MCI rent increases for the backflow preventer and laundry room renovations wasn't irrational or unreasonable. Therefore, the DHCR's ruling must be upheld.

Landlord applied for MCI hikes based on the installation of a backflow preventer and laundry room renovations. The DHCR ruled against landlord, and landlord appealed. The Westchester court ruled for landlord, and the DHCR then appealed. The appeals court ruled for the DHCR. The DHCR's ruling that denied landlord MCI rent increases for the backflow preventer and laundry room renovations wasn't irrational or unreasonable. Therefore, the DHCR's ruling must be upheld.

Matter of 126 Franklin Avenue Associates: NYLJ, p. 27, col. 2 (4/22/94) (App. Div. 2 Dept.; Bracken, JP, Sullivan, Miller, Hart, JJ)

Topics

More like this