601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- Citation
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- Parent Document
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- Jurisdiction
- New York (state)
- Effective Date
- 2000-02-09
Other Sections in This Document (21)
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
- 601 West 160 Realty Corp. v. Henry, 183 Misc. 2d 666 (2000)
Full Text
959 charsThere was extensive testimony from both Mr. Brown and respondent Henry regarding a Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) rent reduction order, the eventual restoration of that reduction, and the ef*670forts the landlord spent with various tenants to collect the arrears it created for the tenants. Both parties testified as to their respective versions of a tenants’ meeting with petitioner regarding the tenants’ options for repayment. Although respondent Henry testified he was not given the same DHCR authorized options to repay as other tenants were offered, that claim is not relevant to the prima facie case respondent is required to prove pursuant to Real Property Law § 223-b for a retaliatory eviction defense. Similarly, the petitioner’s testimony regarding their various efforts to collect respondent’s arrears created by the DHCR restoration order does not provide a basis for the nonpayment petitions, as petitioner’s witness conceded.