Case Name: Douglas L. Leight et al., Plaintiffs, and John H. Masten, Appellant, v. W7879 LLC et al., Respondents
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2016-03-24
Citations: 27 N.Y.3d 929
Docket Number: 
Parties: Douglas L. Leight et al., Plaintiffs, and John H. Masten, Appellant, v W7879 LLC et al., Respondents.
Judges: Concur: Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Pigott, Rivera, Abdus-Salaam, Stein, Fahey and Garcia.
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 27
Pages: 929–930

Head Matter:
[48 NE3d 960, 28 NYS3d 679]
Douglas L. Leight et al., Plaintiffs, and John H. Masten, Appellant, v W7879 LLC et al., Respondents.
Decided March 24, 2016
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Collins, Dobkin & Miller LLP, New York City (Seth A. Miller of counsel), for appellant.
Kucker & Bruh, LLP, New York City (Patrick K. Munson of counsel), for respondents.
Himmelstein, McConnell, Gribben, Donoghue & Joseph, New York City (.Ronald S. Languedoc of counsel), for Metropolitan Council on Housing, amicus curiae.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, and certified question not answered upon the ground that it is unnecessary. Plaintiff John H. Masten failed to establish that his apartment, which was deregulated in 2000 by an unchallenged order of the Division of Housing and Community Renewal, became re-regulated when he executed a renewal lease at market rate.
Concur: Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Pigott, Rivera, Abdus-Salaam, Stein, Fahey and Garcia.