1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. A.D.2d
  4. 248 A.D.2d
  5. 248 A.D.2d 157 (1998)
 

MATTER OF MILLER v. DIV. OF HOUS. & CMTY. RENEWAL

248 A.D.2d 157 (1998)

669 N.Y.S.2d 567

In the Matter of Edmund N. Miller, Appellant, v. Division of Housing and Community Renewal, Respondent

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.

March 5, 1998

We agree that the apartment's registered owner was properly served with the rent overcharge order (9 NYCRR 2527.3 [c]) and that its managing agent's PAR was brought more than 35 days after the issuance of such order (9 NYCRR 2529.2). We also reject petitioner's argument that his PAR was nevertheless timely because respondent did not also serve the order on a certain corporation mentioned in the tenant's initial complaint (9 NYCRR 2527.3 [c]). This fact-based, controvertible...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

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.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases