New York Real Estate Appellate Attorneys

Rosenberg & Estis, P.C., represents clients in appeals in New York state and federal courts involving all areas of real estate, including property valuation, rent regulation, landlord-tenant disputes, Mitchell-Lama housing issues, lease disputes, brokerage disputes, condemnation and constitutional law. Our firm is the "go to" firm for expertise essential to industry groups, such as the RSA, CHIP and REBNY, to act as amicus curiae counsel in appeals vital to New York's real estate industry.

Rosenberg & Estis, P.C. does not just win appeals; we make law. Our appellate lawyers have prevailed in a number of groundbreaking and precedent-setting appeals, including:

  • 220 CPS "Save Our Homes" Assn. v. DHCR: The Appellate Division held that DHCR need not conduct a SEQRA review in connection with the owner's application to recover rent stabilized tenants' apartments, based on the owner's intention to demolish the building.
  • 520 E. 81st St. Associates v. State of New York: The Appellate Division held, for the first time in New York state history, that the victim of a governmental "taking" of property is entitled to compound interest on damages.
  • 936 Second Avenue, L.P. v. Second Corporate Development Co., Inc., et al: The Appellate Division affirmed an appraisal award in favor of our client, a New York building owner, in connection with the determination of the rent for the renewal term under the building's net lease. We convinced the Court that the appraisal was properly conducted pursuant to the net lease's terms and that there was no basis to overturn the award.
  • Chelsea 19 Associates v. James: The Appellate Division ruled that, absent extraordinary circumstances, tenants who breach stipulations whereby they agree to pay timely rent arrears will be evicted.
  • Georgia Properties, Inc. v. Dalsimer: The Appellate Division voided an agreement whereby the owner forfeited its right to evict a tenant based on luxury deregulation.
  • KSLM v. DHCR: The Court of Appeals held that hundreds of former Mitchell-Lama apartments are eligible for "unique and peculiar" rent increases under the rent stabilization law.
  • Manocherian v. Lenox Hill Hospital: The New York State Court of Appeals struck down a portion of the Rent Stabilization Law as unconstitutional.
  • Pultz v. Economakis: The Court of Appeals ruled that there is no limit to the number of apartments an owner can recover under the rent stabilization law for owner's use.
  • Riverside Syndicate v. Munroe: The Court of Appeals voided an agreement whereby a tenant agreed to pay a rent overcharge in exchange for the owner's forfeiture of its right to evict the tenant based on non-primary residence.

For more information about our attorneys or our appellate practice, contact us online or call 212-867-6000.