Summary
In Calamaras v 23rd Second Avenue, LLC, 305 AD2d 216 [1st Dept 2003]), the first department held that in a proceeding in which a landlord sought permission from DHCR to evict tenants for the purpose of constructing a new building, a requisite showing of a good faith intention and financial ability to construct such new building on the part of the owner must be made.
Summary of this case from 118 Duane LLC v. N.Y. State Div. of Homes & Cmty. RenewalOpinion
1126N, 1127N, 1127NA, 1127NB
May 13, 2003.
Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Tompkins, J.), entered May 28, June 25, August 27 and September 6, 2002, which denied plaintiffs' motions to compel compliance with, or granted defendants' motions to quash, subpoenas issued by plaintiffs in connection with a proceeding pending before the Division of Housing and Community Renewal in which defendants seek authorization to evict plaintiffs, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
David Rosenholc, for plaintiffs-appellants.
Magda L. Cruz, for defendants-respondents.
Before: Nardelli, J.P., Tom, Rosenberger, Ellerin, Gonzalez, JJ.
The authorization that defendants seek requires a showing of a good faith intention and financial ability to construct a new building on the site of the buildings in which plaintiffs live (see Rent Stabilization Law [9 NYCRR] 2524.5[a][2]; Matter of Baba v. 1133 Bldg. Corp., 210 A.D.2d 6). Such requirement does not justify the fishing expedition that plaintiffs would undertake into every aspect of defendants' finances and projects. Nor is defendants' hiring of a private investigator to investigate plaintiffs a proper subject of inquiry, absent evidence that plaintiffs were harassed by the investigation ( 9 NYCRR 2525.5).
We have considered and rejected plaintiffs' other arguments.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.