Telephone: work(212) 431-1300 Ext. 449
Facsimile: workfax(212) 965-2657
Paul N. Gruber is a partner of the Firm in the Appellate Division. He has represented property owners in hundreds of appeals and related matters at all levels of Appellate Courts in New York during his twenty years of practice. He has received numerous favorable decisions from the Appellate Courts in areas as diverse as primary residence, rent regulations, lease construction, nonpayment litigation and loft regulation.
Mr. Gruber is a contributing author to Treiman’s Landlord and Tenant Monthly and has also published articles in the Real Property Law Journal of the New York State Bar Association. He is also a presenter in Continuing Legal Education presentations sponsored by the New York County Lawyers’ Association and New York State Bar Association as well as the secretary of the Committee on Landlord and Tenant Proceedings for the New York State Bar Association.
Mr. Gruber has been the lead or co-counsel on the following important cases:
- 104 West 27th Street Realty Inc. v. Lim – (October 24, 2013) Upheld judgment in excess of $400,000 against the guarantor of a commercial lease where there had been a change in the amount of space made after the guaranty was executed where guaranty stated it applied in the event the lease was modified.
- Piller v. Marsam Realty 13th Avenue LLC – (October 23, 2013) Held that a prospective purchaser of two apartment buildings in Brooklyn was not entitled to specific performance of a letter of intent affording him the opportunity to enter into a purchase agreement and close on the properties by a date certain upon certain terms where the letter of intent did not include all the necessary terms of a contract for the sale of real property, where the purchaser continued to negotiate terms up to the day scheduled for closing and where funds were not available until after the day scheduled for closing.
- Lee v. DHCR, 73 A.D. 3d 778 (2d Dep’t 2010). DHCR directed to re-open rent overcharge proceedings to consider leases and other rent history that was first submitted by the owner to DHCR on a post petition application to the agency where the owner offered a credible explanation for not submitting the material earlier and the evidence demonstrated that there was likely no overcharge.
- 985-987 First Avenue LLC v. Aretakis, 25 Misc.3d 62 (App. T. 1st Dep’t 2009). Recovered rent stabilized apartment from attorney on nonprimary residence grounds where documentary evidence connected him to an upstate residence owned by his wife notwithstanding his claims they maintained separate residences and that he used apartment for his law practice. The court noted the absence of electrical usage and the tenant’s failure to seek enforcement of a court order directing the landlord supply a working refrigerator.
- Wassfam LLC v. Ude, 26 Misc.3d 90 (App. T. 1st Dep’t 2009). Obtained a final judgment of possession against a tenant who was given a lease in a building subject to rent stabilization solely due to its receipt of J-51 benefits where the tax benefit had expired and the stipulation affording him tenancy rights erroneously prescribed that he would receive a rent stabilized lease.
- 315 E. 72nd Street Owners Inc. v. Siegel, 22 Misc.3d 10 (App. T. 1st Dep’t 2008). Succession rights denied to the grandson of a deceased rent stabilized tenant where the grandson had resided with his parents in Florida, returned to New York prior to commencing college in New York, resided in campus housing while in college and stayed in his grandmother’s apartment shortly before starting college and during breaks and occasional weekends.
- Goldman v. LaFollette Corp., NYLJ June 4, 2002 p. 15 col. 1 (App. T. 1st Dep’t) and Herald Towers, LLC v. Jeet International, Ltd. NYLJ, Jan. 24, 2002 p. 19 col. 4 (App. T. 1st Dep’t). Recovered possession of rent stabilized apartments let to corporate tenants as nonprimary residents.
- DK Property Inc. v. MeKong Restaurant Corp., 187 Misc. 2d 610 (App. T. 1st Dep’t 2001). Liberalized standard for holdover notices in commercial proceedings.
- Goldman v. Becraft, NYLJ July 13, 2001 p. 18 col. 2 (App. T. 1st Dep’t). Rejected the tenant’s effort to avoid defending a primary residence case on the merits when owner inadvertently accepted rent prior to commencement of the holdover proceeding.
- Pleasant East Associates v. Soto, NYLJ May 13, 1996 p. 28 col. 2 (App. T. 1st Dep’t). Affirmed jury verdict evicting tenant for drug activity committed by her former boyfriend in the apartment.
- DBL Realty Co. v. Zavala, 166 Misc. 2d 736 (App. T. 1st Dep’t 1995). Vacated rent overcharge award predicated upon late DHCR registration as violative of 1993 Rent Regulation Reform Act.
- Teichman v. Ciapi, 160 Misc. 2d 182 (App. T. 1st Dept 1994). Permitted an owner’s own use proceeding to go forward on notice of nonrenewal alleging minimal facts.
- Cyline Properties Co. v. Rubin, NYLJ February 15, 1994 p. 28 col. 4 (App. T. 1st Dep’t) – First Appellate ruling holding that a nonprimary residence case may be maintained against nonpurchasing rent regulated tenant under a noneviction cooperative conversion plan.
- Baer v. Gotham Craftsman, 154 Misc. 2d 490 (App. T. 1st Dep’t 1992). Established that a loft landlord is permitted to seek rent where noncompliance with the legalization timetable of statute is due to the city’s failure to entertain applications or issue regulations.
- Briar Hill Apartments Co. v. Teperman, 165 A.D.2d 519 (1st Dept’ 1991). Established criteria to determine non-primary residence issues.
- Goho Equities v. Weiss, 149 Misc. 2d 628 (App. T. 1st Dep’t 1991). Established that a loft landlord need not refund rents collected when not in compliance with legalization timetable.
- Sohn v. Calderon, 78 N.Y.2d 755 (1991). Established areas where administrative agencies have exclusive jurisdiction.
- Beaux Arts Properties Co. v. Whalen, NYLJ Jan. 12, 1990 p. 21 col. 2 (App. T 1st Dep’t). First Appellate decision to authorize attorneys to issue rent demands.
- Rose Associates v. Lewandowski, NYLJ Nov. 1, 1989 p. 21 col. 1 (App. T. 1st Dep’t). First Appellate decision indicating that a notice of nonrenewal in a primary residence proceeding is sufficient if it alleges only an alternate address where the landlord believes the tenant resides.
« View all partners