Wong v. Finkelstein
In the Matter of Celia Wong, Appellant, Against Maurice Finkelstein Et Al., Individually and Constituting the Temporary City Housing Rent Commission of the City of New York, Respondents
Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.
A public body cannot be commanded in an article 78 proceeding to perform an act not authorized by the statute from which it derives its power. (See, e.g., Matter of Burr v. Voorhis, 229 N. Y. 382, 387 ;
Matter of Hart, 161 N. Y. 507 ;
Matter of Economy Holding Corp.
v. Berry, 234 App. Div. 214, 217 .) In this case, the defendant commission is not empowered by the applicable local law to issue a certificate of eviction upon the ground that the landlord desires to withdraw the property from the rental market (Local Laws, 1949, No. 7 of City of New York; Administrative Code of City of New York, § U41-7.0, subd. c). To grant the order sought by the landlord in this article 78 proceeding would be to require the commission to exceed its statutory powers. That may not be done.
We neither reach nor pass upon the constitutional questions advanced by appellant. .
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
Loughran, Ch. J., Lewis, Conway, Desmond, Dye, Fuld and Bromley, JJ., concur.
Order affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 9 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.