building at 1 Gracie Terrace

sug,
got a dog in the fight? or just shadenfreude?

No Dog in the fight ... but I do like an APT there. I get no pleasure from the pain of others justt wondering if he board has changed it's ways.

Please be careful what you write. Especially when it could have effect on other people's lively hood. The board at One Gracie Terrace is a is a very well-run effective group and the piece you read in question was dated back some time ago. Not only is the building well run but its on sound-financial standing. I would highly recommend purchasing a unit there.

123 - thank you for your response. My point of asking/posting this was to see if there is a counter point to what's out there on google. Hopefully this thread will serve that prupose. Apprecciate your recomendation.

Here's the latest decision in the ongoing litigation between the PHB tenant and the co-op: http://decisions.courts.state.ny.us/fcas/fcas_docs/2011AUG/3006042352007007SCIV.pdf

I am not a lawyer, and so this reads to me like the issue is that the co-op wants to make repairs that will involve floodproofing which will make the walls thicker and the rooms smaller, and the shareholder wants a leak-free apartment but without that kind of floodproofing. It does seem like repairs can't go forward until both sides agree on what kind of repairs they should be ... NWT has the court ruled on that point?

ali r.
DG Neary Realty

I read this last decision as saying the co-op should go ahead and do what it needs to do, but most likely there're other interpretations. This apparently isn't the only case between them, and I can't tell where all the parties stand. It's been a big mess all around.

The only worse one I can think of is you-know-who's.

More on the never-ending case.

The tenant wanted an order preventing the co-op, in its repair of leak damage, from putting some kind of furring or insulation on the walls. She lost that one in September: http://decisions.courts.state.ny.us/fcas/fcas_docs/2012OCT/3006042352007013SCIV.pdf

She also wanted the co-op to pay $377,000 of her legal fees, as the winning party in three of the case's 11 causes of action. No, said the judge. She has to wait until all 14 are resolved, and then the court will address fees: http://decisions.courts.state.ny.us/fcas/fcas_docs/2012OCT/3006042352007013SCIV.pdf

What's the deal with this building? Is the legal case still going on?

The legal case was resolved over a year ago.