Opinion
2001-05931
Argued March 5, 2002.
March 25, 2002.
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review so much of a determination of the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal, dated October 18, 2000, as confirmed those portions of two determinations of the District Rent Administrator, both dated September 24, 1999, finding that two apartments owned by the petitioners were subject to rent-control regulations, the petitioners appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dollard, J.), dated May 1, 2001, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.
Kucker Bruh, LLP, New York, N.Y. (James Marino and Patrick K. Munson of counsel), for appellants.
Marcia P. Hirsch, New York, N.Y. (Caroline M. Sullivan of counsel), for respondent.
Anthony R. Mordente, P.C., Fresh Meadows, N.Y. (Anthony J. Rodriguez of counsel), for intervenor-respondent.
Before: DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, and DANIEL F. LUCIANO, JJ.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The finding that two apartments owned by the petitioners were subject to rent-control regulations was not arbitrary or capricious (see Matter of DiMaggio v. Division of Hous. Community Renewal, 248 A.D.2d 533). In an earlier holdover proceeding between the petitioners and the tenant renting both apartments, it was determined that the tenancy was subject to rent-control regulations. Therefore, the petitioners are collaterally estopped from relitigating that issue (see Schuylkill Fuel Corp. v. Nieberg Realty Corp., 250 N.Y. 304).
RITTER, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, FRIEDMANN and LUCIANO, JJ., concur.