Summary
In Meyer v Terasaki (117 A.D.2d 520, revg on dissent below NYLJ, July 22, 1985, at 6, col 1 [App Term, 1st Dept]), the Appellate Division held that the failure to include the sixth unit on the certificate of occupancy did not preclude stabilization from attaching to the premises.
Summary of this case from Fleur v. CroyOpinion
February 13, 1986
Order, Appellate Term of the Supreme Court, First Department, entered on July 17, 1985, unanimously reversed, without costs and without disbursements, summary judgment to respondent tenant is granted, and petitioner's motion for said relief is denied for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion of Jawn Sandifer, J., at Appellate Term.
Concur — Sandler, J.P., Sullivan, Fein, Kassal and Rosenberger, JJ.