Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Royal Crospin Corp. v. New York City Loft Board
Citations: 261 A.D.2d 316; 691 N.Y.S.2d 416; 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5812
Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; May 25, 1999; New York; State Appellate Court
The Supreme Court of New York County, presided over by Justice Phyllis Gangel-Jacob, issued an order on April 8, 1998, affirming the Loft Board's rejection of the petitioner owner's challenge application regarding the sale of fixtures and improvements at a specified unit, ruling the application as untimely. The rejection was based on the petitioner's failure to serve the challenge application on both outgoing and prospective tenants at their designated addresses within the 20-day timeframe mandated by 29 RCNY 2-07 (b) and (g.1.ii.A), which commenced upon the tenants' delivery of additional information to the petitioner. The court clarified that the 20-day limit applies solely to the tenants' provision of information and not to the Loft Board's decision on the proposed sale's validity due to prior sales. It stated that the regulatory framework does not allow for postponement of a challenge application pending the Loft Board's ruling. The petitioner had mistakenly ignored the requirement to serve the application at the tenants' attorneys' addresses as specified in the disclosure form, leading to the administrative dismissal of the challenge application. The Loft Board is not required to demonstrate tenant prejudice resulting from the petitioner's noncompliance with the 20-day rule. The court dismissed additional arguments presented by the petitioner as lacking merit. The decision was unanimously affirmed without costs, with concurrence from Justices Nardelli, Wallach, Lerner, Andrias, and Buckley.