Landlord & Tenant Law

In article 78 proceedings brought by landlord and tenants to annul a determination by the New York City Loft Board refusing to accept withdrawal of tenants' application for Loft Law coverage, the Loft Board appealed from Supreme Court's grant of the petition. The Appellate Division modified to uphold the Board's rejection of a proposed settlement, but otherwise affirmed, holding that once the tenants had withdrawn their application and elected instead to obtain rent stabilization status, the Loft Board had no authority to supervise the legalization process.

In 2014, four residents of the subject building submitted Loft Law coverage applications. Landlord initially opposed the application, but the parties reached a settlement under which tenants would withdraw their application, and landlord would register the units with DHCR as rent-stabilized, and would use reasonably diligent efforts to obtain a residential certificate of occupancy. Tenants then sought to withdraw their Loft Board application, and the Administrative Law Judge recommended that the Board accept the withdrawal. The Loft Board, however, rejected the request to withdraw the application as against public policy. When tenants and landlord sought reconsideration, the Board denied their request, prompting separate article 78 proceedings by tenants and landlord. Supreme Court granted the petitions, holding that the Board's order lacked a rational basis and holding that it was irrational to refuse to allow the tenants to withdraw their application. The Loft Board appealed.