| Reich v Belnord Partners, LLC |
| 2019 NY Slip Op 00220 [168 AD3d 482] |
| January 15, 2019 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
[*1](January 15, 2019)
| Elizabeth Reich et al., Appellants, v Belnord Partners,LLC, et al., Respondents. |
Vernon & Ginsburg, LLP, New York (Darryl M. Vernon of counsel), forappellants.
Rosenberg & Estis, P.C., New York (Deborah Riegel of counsel), for respondents.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Arlene P. Bluth, J.), entered September 14, 2017,which granted defendants' motion to dismiss the claim for rent overcharges and denied plaintiffs'cross motion for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3211 (c), unanimously affirmed, withoutcosts.
Plaintiffs' claim for rent overcharges based on defendants' failure to charge rent stabilizedrents while receiving J-51 tax benefits was correctly dismissed pursuant to CPLR 213-a.Consistent with both Matter of ReginaMetro. Co., LLC v New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal (164 AD3d420, 425-426 [1st Dept 2018], lv dismissed 32 NY3d 1085 [2018]) and Taylor v 72A Realty Assoc., L.P. (151AD3d 95, 105-106 [1st Dept 2017]), there was no basis for considering the subjectapartment's rental history more than four years before the commencement of the overchargeclaim. In Matter of Regina Metro. Co., LLC (164 AD3d at 425-426), we held that fraud isthe only exception to the four-year look back period to determine the legally regulated rent on thebase date. There is no fraud here. In Taylor v 72A Realty Assoc., L.P. (151 AD3d at105-106), we permitted a longer look back period under certain circumstances not necessarilyindicative of fraud. Those circumstances are not present, where, as here, the tenant received arent stabilized lease and the landlord registered the rent with DHCR more than four years beforeany rent overcharge complaint was filed.
In view of the dismissal of the rent overcharge claim, plaintiffs' motion for summaryjudgment on that claim and the dependent claims for treble damages and attorneys' fees wascorrectly denied. Plaintiffs abandoned their application for summary judgment on the claims fordeclaratory and injunctive relief by failing to make any arguments in support thereof on appeal.Concur—Renwick, J.P., Gische, Kahn, Kern, Moulton, JJ.