Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
<i>Altman</i>: Six Takeaways
On April 26, 2018, a unanimous Court of Appeals held that apartments vacated between 1997 and 2011 will be considered luxury deregulated where the legal regulated rent was $2,000 or more at the time the incoming tenant moved in. The court reversed the First Department, which had held that such apartments would not be deregulated unless the rent was $2,000 or more at the time the outgoing tenant vacated. As has been widely reported, this was a major victory for the real estate industry.
This article will discuss the various impacts of the Altman decision.
1. A Good Day for Statutory Interpretation
Rent regulatory disputes often turn political; a court will frequently ignore or expand statutory language to achieve a desired outcome based on its views of tenant protection, affordable housing, or property rights. The Court of Appeals' ruling in Altman, however, was apolitical.
The court analyzed the case as one of pure statutory construction. The tenant in Altman had argued that the first and second clauses in RSL §26-504.2(a) were identical, and that both barred luxury deregulation unless the rent was $2,000 or more at the time the outgoing tenant vacated. The Court of Appeals held that the second clause, added in 1997 and preceded by the word “or,” had to mean something different than the first, ruling that the second clause permitted deregulation where the rent reached $2,000 or more “after the tenants' vacancy” (italics in original). The court further observed that the legislative history, which “could not be clearer,” supported its interpretation.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.