Park of Edgewater, Inc. v. Joy, 53 N.Y.2d 946 (1981)
A change in law applies to pending cases when the legislature intends retroactive application, especially when the case concerns a specific transaction rather than a broad constitutional issue and any constitutional challenges have been waived.
Summary
This case addresses the retroactive application of amendments to the Rent Control Law concerning vacancy decontrol following a transfer of a land lease to a family member. Park of Edgewater, Inc. sought decontrol of a ground lease after the leaseholders transferred title to their son. The Rent and Eviction Regulations initially denied decontrol, a decision challenged by Park. While the appeal was pending, amendments to the Rent Control Law clarified that such transfers do not result in decontrol and were made retroactive. The Court of Appeals held that the retroactive law applied because the parties waived any constitutional objections and the case concerned a specific transfer rather than a broader constitutional issue. Thus, the transfer did not decontrol the property.
Facts
Sheldon and his wife leased land (77-D Edgewater Park) and built a house on it.
On August 5, 1975, they transferred the house’s title to their son, Robert, for one dollar.
Park of Edgewater, Inc., the lessor, filed a report seeking vacancy decontrol based on this transfer.
Procedural History
The District Director denied the decontrol, fixing the land rent at $34.64 per month.
Park of Edgewater’s protest to the Commissioner of Housing was denied.
Park initiated an Article 78 proceeding, which was dismissed by Special Term, finding the lease subject to control.
The Appellate Division reversed, holding that ground rentals were decontrolled upon transfer under the vacancy decontrol law.
While the appeal to the Court of Appeals was pending, Chapter 69 of the Laws of 1980 amended the Rent Control Law, clarifying that transfers to family members do not decontrol the lease and was made retroactive to July 1, 1971.
Issue(s)
Whether amendments to the Rent Control Law, specifically Chapter 69 of the Laws of 1980, which clarify that transfer of a land lease to a family member does not result in decontrol and which were made retroactive to July 1, 1971, should apply to a case pending on appeal where the transfer occurred on August 5, 1975, and where the parties have waived any constitutional objections to the retroactive application of the amendments?
Holding
Yes, because the appeal is to be decided in accordance with the law at the time of the decision and the amendments were expressly made retroactive to a date prior to the transfer in question; moreover, any constitutional challenges to the retroactive application were waived by the parties.
Court’s Reasoning
The court applied the principle that an appeal is to be decided according to the law in effect at the time of the decision, citing Matter of Boardwalk & Seashore Corp. v. Murdock, 286 NY 494. The amendments to the Rent Control Law (Chapter 69 of the Laws of 1980) were explicitly made retroactive to July 1, 1971. Since the transfer to the son occurred on August 5, 1975, the new law directly applied to the facts of the case.
The court distinguished this case from situations involving grave public policy or constitutional issues that might necessitate addressing constitutional questions even if not raised by the parties. Here, the parties expressly waived any constitutional challenges to the retroactive application of the law.
The court emphasized the specific nature of the proceeding, which concerned only a transfer to an immediate family member. The decision was narrowly tailored to the facts presented and the legal posture of the case, particularly the waiver of constitutional arguments. The Court noted it was not addressing whether transfers to non-family members would result in decontrol, leaving that issue for another day. The court cited Massachusetts Nat. Bank v Shinn, 163 NY 360 regarding the court’s discretion to avoid deciding constitutional questions when not properly raised.