Everyone had been served with nonrenewal notices which noted the owners' intention to recover possession of these units for their "personal use."
Pultz and others filed suit alleging that the Rent Stabilization Law was designed to severely limit situations in which an owner can recover regulated apartments, and sought a court order declaring the Economakis' plan violative of law.
Mr. and Mrs. Economakis countered that the governing rules currently permit owners to recover an unlimited number of apartments for their personal use so long as they can demonstrate (to a judge's satisfaction) a "good faith" intention to occupy the units as a primary residence.
While the tenants won before the New York County Supreme Court, the Appellate Division, First Department, reversed, and an appeal to our State's highest court ensued.
Just a few days ago, on June 3, 2008, the New York State Court of Appeals found the "plain language" of the law allows owners to recover "one or more" stabilized apartments for their use "or that of a family member." The Court noted that the law's "unambiguous language" permits landlords "to live in their own buildings if they so choose," even if that means the loss of affordable housing and diminishes the available supply of regulated apartments.
Tenant advocates are in an uproar over this decision.
Let's just say, they don't have much use for this "owner's use" case.
To download a copy of the Court of Appeals' decision, please use this link: Pultz v. Economakis