The court properly held that petitioner had failed to meet the Board's regulatory 20-day filing deadline (29 RCNY 2-07 [f] [3]), and that the Board had reasonably interpreted challenge deadlines strictly on the ground that delay presumptively prejudiced the tenants (see, Katz v Segal, Sup Ct, NY County, Feb. 7, 1991, Ciparick, J., index No. 09216/90). The determination was thus neither arbitrary, capricious nor made in bad faith (see, Matter of Pell...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.