Opinion
No. 183 SSM 30.
Decided November 27, 2007.
APPEAL from an order of the Appellate Division of THE Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, entered May 29, 2007. The Appellate Division, with two Justices dissenting, affirmed an order of the Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Werner Kornreich, J.), which had denied a petition to annul respondent's order for a rent reduction on the ground of a reduction in services.
Matter of 333 E. 49th Assoc., LP v. New York State Div. of Hous. Community Renewal, Off. of Rent Admin., 40 AD3d 516, affirmed.
Shaw and Binder, New York City ( Robert H. Gordon of counsel), for appellants.
Gary R. Connor, New York City, and Jeffrey G. Kelly for respondent.
OPINION OF THE COURT
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
A rational basis exists for the Division of Housing and Community Renewal's determination that petitioners failed to maintain adequate janitorial services warranting a rent reduction ( see Matter of Gilman v. New York State Div. of Hous. Community Renewal, 99 NY2d 144, 149). The determination, implicitly rejecting petitioners' claim that the violation was de minimis, is rationally based on the inspector's observations of debris in the compactor rooms, which confirmed the tenants' sworn complaint of filthy compactor rooms that were not maintained. DHCR's determination that petitioners reduced services by failing to maintain the compactor rooms was not irrational and must be sustained ( see Matter of KSLM-Columbus Apts., Inc. v. New York State Div. of Hous. Community Renewal, 5 NY3d 303, 312; Matter of Mid-State Mgt. Corp. v. New York City Conciliation Appeals Bd., 112 AD2d 72, 75-76 [1st Dept 1985], affd 66 NY2d 1032).
Chief Judge KAYE and Judges CIPARICK, GRAFFEO and JONES concur; Judges READ, SMITH and PIGOTT dissent and vote to reverse for the reasons stated in the dissenting memorandum by Justice George D. Marlow at the Appellate Division ( 40 AD3d 516, 517-520).
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals ( 22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.