Case Type

Article 78

Housing Type

Rent Stabilized

Court

Appellate Division, First Department

County

New York County (Manhattan)

Slip Opinion Number

2026 NY Slip Op 04982

Petitioner

382 8th Ave. Realty Corp.

Respondent

NYS Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal

Judge

Manzanet-Daniels, Sallie, J.P.; González, Lizbeth; Higgitt, Andrew; Michael, John R.; Chan, Peter

Decision/Order Date

2026-08-13

Posture

Post-Answer Motion by Landlord

Disposition

Affirmed for Tenant

Winner

Tenant Substantially Won

Synopsis

In this Article 78 proceeding, the landlord sought to annul DHCR's determination on a petition for administrative review (PAR), arguing that the building underwent substantial rehabilitation and therefore was not subject to rent stabilization. The Appellate Division, 1st Department affirmed the Supreme Court's dismissal of the proceeding and upheld DHCR's decision, finding that the owner failed to establish substantial rehabilitation. The court upheld the retroactive application of Operational Bulletin 95-2 (issued in 1995 regarding work performed between 1981 and 1984), finding it conformed to the guidelines set by the court. The court found insufficient proof that at least 11 of 14 required building-wide systems and common areas had been replaced, rejecting conclusory statements from the owner and architect and affording broad deference to DHCR's factual findings.

Keywords

Article 78; Substantial Rehabilitation; Retroactive Application Of Operational Bulletin; Insufficient Proof Of Substantial Rehabilitation; Court Rejects Conclusory Statements; Broad Deference Given To DHCR Factual Determinations

Download

Takedown Policy

Share

COinS