Case ID: ad2d_189/html/0594-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

(January 12, 1993)
    Rent Stabilization Association of New York City, Inc., et al., Appellants, and Small Property Owners of New York, Intervenor-Appellant, v Richard L. Higgins, as Commissioner of the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, Respondent, and Robert Wells et al., Intervenors-Respondents.
   — Judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Irma Vidal Santaella, J.), entered November 27, 1991, declaring "family member” succession rights regulations promulgated by respondent to be a valid exercisé of its administrative power, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The regulations in question are valid for the reasons set forth in this Court’s opinion on the application for a preliminary injunction (164 AD2d 283). Even under the heightened scrutiny applicable to regulatory takings, the regulations substantially advance a legitimate governmental interest (see, Nollan v California Coastal Commn., 483 US 825, 834).

Subsequent decisions in Lucas v South Carolina Coastal Council (505 US —, 112 S Ct 2886) and Yee v City of Escondido (503 US —, 112 S Ct 1522) do not, in this instance, warrant a departure from our prior conclusion that plaintiffs’ challenge to the administrative regulations lacks merit (see, Hanover Ins. Co. v D & W Cent. Sta. Alarm Co., 164 AD2d 112, 115). Concur — Murphy, P. J., Ellerin, Kupferman, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.