Albany, NY – In a decision that will allow thousands of New Yorkers to sue their landlords, the state’s top court on Monday ruled that tenants of three Manhattan apartment buildings who claim their rent was illegally raised can proceed with class action lawsuits.
Subscribe to our Daily Roundup Email
The Court of Appeals rejected claims by the owners of the buildings that state law prohibits class action suits in landlord-tenant disputes. It was the first time the court addressed the issue.
The tenants say the owners of the three Manhattan buildings, including one in the exclusive Sutton Place neighborhood, unlawfully took their apartments out of New York City’s rent control program despite still collecting tax breaks.
Nearly 20 similar lawsuits are pending in New York state courts involving several thousand people and they will also be able to proceed under Monday’s ruling. The size of the classes range from about 30 tenants to more than 500.
Matthew Brinckerhoff, who represents renters in one of Monday’s cases and five similar lawsuits, said the decision was crucial because individual tenants were unlikely to file suit, since attorney fees alone would be more than they stood to recover from their landlords.
“Most tenants don’t go out and vindicate their rights, even in a clear-cut case like this,” said Brinckerhoff, of the law firm Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady. “They just keep on paying.”
A lawyer for one of the landlords, Jemrock Realty Company LLC, declined to comment. Lawyers for the other two landlords did not return requests for comment.
State law allows tenants to seek three times the amount of a rent overcharge when they file suit individually. The court on Monday said the class actions could proceed because the plaintiffs waived that right and agreed to seek only a refund on the amount they said they were overcharged.
The decision affirmed three separate rulings by a lower court.
The cases are Borden v. 400 East 55th Street Associates; Gudz v. Jemrock Realty Company LLC; and Downing v. First Lenox Terrace Associates, New York State Court of Appeals Nos. 182-184.