Summary
In Heller v. Middagh Street Assoc., 4 AD3d 332, 771 NYS2d 533 (2nd Dep't 2004), the tenant commenced an action for breach of contract claiming that by attaching rent stabilization riders to certain leases, and by tendering renewal leases using rent stabilization forms, the landlord contractually agreed to subject the tenant's apartment to rent stabilization.
Summary of this case from Carrano v. CastroOpinion
2002-10375.
Decided February 2, 2004.
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their briefs, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (G. Aronin, J.), dated September 27, 2002, as granted those branches of the defendant's cross motion which were to dismiss their first, third, and fourth causes of action.
Hartman, Ule, Rose Ratner, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Jacques F. Rose of counsel), for appellants.
Neddi Heller, Will Halgren, Heather J. Bates, Cheryl Spielman, Ann Devere, Saundi Wilson, Henry Yee, Michael Keel, Joanie James, Ronda Kaysen, Thomas Kandanian, Marissa Mandel, Nona S. Lynch, Lauren Smilowitz, George Cohen, Cedric Turner, Donna Peters, Marion M. Lukasik, Gary Minda, Nancy Minda, Aurora Aguero, Jay Siegall, Karen Zebulon, Amanda Anderson, Ollie Johnson, Kathleen Johnson, Peter Vanerp, John Heward, Katherine Davis, Mary Sillman, Carole Magary, David A. Cohen, Dorothy Barnhouse, Jack Bales, Anita Karl, and James Kemp. Mayer, Brown, Rowe Maw, New York, N.Y. (Kirk Hoffman and Andrew Schapiro of counsel), for appellants.
James Sepyo Cameron, Mary Weeks, Avis Allman, Wayne Sorce, Daniel J. Hunyady, and Farrand B. Ennis. Davidoff Malito, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Mark E. Spund of counsel), for respondent.
Before: MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P., BARRY A. COZIER, WILLIAM F. MASTRO and REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs payable by the appellants appearing separately and filing separate briefs.
Contrary to the appellants' contention, the Supreme Court properly dismissed their first cause of action in which they claimed that by attaching rent stabilization riders to certain leases, and by tendering rent renewal leases using rent stabilization forms, the defendant contractually agreed to subject the appellants' apartments to the Rent Stabilization Law ( see Mayflower Assoc. v. Gray, NYLJ, Mar. 1, 1994, at 21, col 1 [App Term, 1st Dept, Parness, J.P.]; 7 Dunham Place Realty v. Arndt, 189 Misc.2d 710, 715).
The appellants' remaining contentions are without merit.
ALTMAN, J.P., COZIER, MASTRO and RIVERA, JJ., concur.