Gerard v. Clermont York Associates, LLC

• Decision Date: 15 February 2011
• Citation: 916 N.Y.S.2d 502,81 A.D.3d 497
• Parties: Paula GERARD, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CLERMONT YORK ASSOCIATES, LLC, Defendant-Respondent.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

916 N.Y.S.2d 502

81 A.D.3d 497

Paula GERARD, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.CLERMONT YORK ASSOCIATES, LLC, Defendant-Respondent.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Feb. 15, 2011.

Himmelstein, McConnell, Gribben, Donoghue & Joseph, New York (William J. Gribben of counsel), for appellants.

Horing Welikson & Rosen, P.C., Williston Park (Niles C. Welikson of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (O. Peter Sherwood, J.), entered August 5, 2010, which, in this putative class action commenced by plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated alleging wrongful deregulation of certain rent-stabilized apartments by defendant owner and its predecessors in interest who have been receiving J-51 tax benefits since July 1997, granted defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied.

The court abused its discretion in dismissing the complaint under the doctrine of primary jurisdiction. This action presents legal issues left open after the Court of Appeals' decision inRoberts v. Tishman Speyer Props., L.P., 13 N.Y.3d 270, 890 N.Y.S.2d 388, 918...