X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Menachem J. Kastner and Ally HackMenachem J. Kastner and Ally Hack ()

Much ink has been spilled by the New York State courts, the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR), and legal commentators,1 about the application of the “four-year rule” post-Grimm v. DHCR2 (and its progeny), and, specifically, the slow and painful erosion of the rule. The “four-year rule” is embodied in RSL 26-516(a)(2) and CPLR 213-a, and is a statute of limitations on claims brought by a residential tenant against his landlord based on allegations that he was overcharged in rent, whereby the look-back period of increases was limited to four years prior to the interposition of tenant’s overcharge claims, whether in court or before the DHCR. Prior to Thornton v. Baron, Grimm, and other similarly decided cases that have come down over the past decade, the four-year rule was a statute of limitations that was as much set in stone as any other statute of limitations in New York.

However, after Thornton,Grimm, and the other similarly decided cases, the courts began sidestepping (or trampling) the four years and examining rent increases or “bumps” well beyond four years simply based on a tenant’s mere invocation of a “colorable claim of fraud,” thereby putting the landlord to the task of refuting the tenant’s fraud allegations in order to limit the court’s or DHCR’s look-back period to the statutory four years. But, perhaps, no longer.

On June 26, 2014, the Court of Appeals revisited the issue and, by its unanimous ruling in Boyd v. DHCR,3 implicitly held that the four-year statute of limitations is still very much the rule and its “indicia of fraud” pronouncement in Grimm is still, as much, the exception. Merely waiving the “fraud” flag does not open the Grimm floodgates, sweeping away the four-year rule.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

 
Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.

 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.