Case ID: ad3d_12/html/0161-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In the Matter of Lillian Goldman Family, LLC, Appellant, v New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, Respondent, and Sandra J. Birnhak, Intervenor-Respondent.
    [783 NYS2d 471]
   Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Beeler, J.), entered April 21, 2003, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 seeking to annul an order of respondent Division of Housing and Community Renewal, dated August 22, 2002, affirming a determination of the Rent Administrator, inter alia, finding that there had been a reduction in essential services to the rent stabilized and rent controlled tenants in petitioner landlord’s building and imposing a rent reduction, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The determination as to whether essential building services had been reduced was strictly within respondent’s purview (see Matter of ANF Co. v Division of Hous. & Community Renewal, 176 AD2d 518, 520 [1991]), and its finding that the elimination of one of the subject building’s three elevators constituted a reduction in essential services had a rational basis and was not arbitrary and capricious. Accordingly, a reduction of rent was mandatory (see 9 NYCRR 2202.16 [a]; 2523.4 [a]; and see Matter of ANF Co. at 520). The amount of the reduction imposed was reasonable.

Petitioner’s remaining contentions are unavailing. Concur— Nardelli, J.P., Andrias, Sullivan, Williams and Friedman, JJ.