Collazo v Netherland Prop. Assets LLC
2017 NY Slip Op 08305 [155 AD3d 538]
November 28, 2017
Appellate Division, First Department
As corrected through Wednesday, January 3, 2018


[*1]
 Daniel Collazo et al., Appellants,
v
Netherland PropertyAssets LLC et al., Respondents.

Himmelstein, McConnell, Gribben, Donoghue & Joseph LLP, New York (Jesse D.Gribben of counsel), for appellants.

Katsky Korins LLP, New York (Adrienne B. Koch of counsel), for respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (David B. Cohen, J.), entered March 7, 2017,which granted defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiffs' complaint, unanimously affirmed, withoutcosts.

The motion court providently exercised its discretion in ruling that plaintiffs' rent overchargeclaims should be determined by the New York State Division of Housing and CommunityRenewal in the first instance (Olsen vStellar W. 110, LLC, 96 AD3d 440, 441-442 [1st Dept 2012], lv dismissed 20NY3d 1000 [2013]). The court also correctly ruled that plaintiffs had failed to state a cause ofaction for relief under General Business Law § 349 (Aguaiza v Vantage Props., LLC, 69AD3d 422, 423 [1st Dept 2010]). Concur—Richter, J.P., Kapnick, Webber, Oing andSingh, JJ. [Prior Case History: 2017 NY Slip Op 31709(U).]


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.