Living with Legends

BD Hotels sued Arthur Nash in housing court, alleging that his apartment was not rent stabilized.  But last week, when the judge asked BD to provide evidence to that effect, they couldn’t do it, and didn’t even try.  Arthur, on the other hand, had a letter wherein BD admitted that another Chelsea Hotel resident was rent stabilized.  The judge took one look at this letter and threw the case out.  (He dismissed the case with prejudice, which means that BD can refile if they come up with new evidence, but chances are they won’t be able to.)
        Arthur’s case is important for another reason as well, because he represented himself, and it shows that tenants don’t need to back down from BD and their high priced lawyers.  Judges in housing court don’t necessarily expect tenants to have lawyers, and they are likely to be reasonable if you do your homework as Arthur did, and know your rights.
     Artie weighs in "… Krauss and Elder’s attorneys came on with bullying tactics and it was under this pressure at least a half dozen residents i’m aware of left the hotel. there are probably more. But from the start their case consisted of a bluff; they got called on it and crumbled, actually admitting to [Judge Wendt] they had no proof to support the claim that has had us in courtrooms, researching and writing legal motions since last november. Moreover opposing counsel conceded they’d be unlikely to find that proof in the future. Some would call this type of lawsuit ‘frivilous’. If there is a ’round two’, the only consolation might be that we’d get to use the rest of the research in support of our counterclaims."