Home Alone 2, Lost in New York premiered a little over three decades ago, just in time for Christmas. The holiday release became an instant classic. One can imagine that an updated version would perhaps include an Airbnb stay, were it not for the new short-term rental laws now in effect. According to a recent NY Times article, “[c]ity officials estimated there were roughly 10,800 Airbnb listings as of March 2023 that were illegal short-term rentals.”
Administrative Law Challenge in State Court
In a still-active, recent NY State Court case before the Honorable Arlene Bluth, three petitioners are seeking injunctive relief to stop the enforcement of code sections enacted this year that effectively ban short-term rentals in the famous city. Petitioners argued they will suffer irreparable injury if an injunction is not granted. They argue the final rules would result in abrupt cancellations of bookings, and harm their ability to earn income from hosting guests. They assert that preserving the status quo and allowing hosts to continue to entertain visitors in New York is in the best interest of the balance of equities.
At the heart of the dispute is Local Law 18, a set of strict guidelines governing short-term rentals (less than 30 consecutive days). The law includes the promulgation and maintenance of a Prohibited Buildings List, which effectively prevents tenants from registering properties over the wishes of building owners, co-op, and condo boards without their express consent. (See, e.g., § 21-10 titled Registered host requirements ) The enforcement arm is the New York City Mayor’s Office of Special Enforcement (OSE).
Airbnb’s Hardships Are No Match for the City that Never Sleeps
In August of this year, Airbnb lost its bid for an injunction against enforcement of Local Law 18, arguing that the requirements are arbitrary and capricious and that the rules should be stricken. They further asserted that the rules have a chilling effect on hosts simply wishing to lawfully engage in the short-term rental business. Finally, they insisted that Airbnb’s business will be substantially affected. They claimed losses could be as high as up to 95% of their net revenue from short-term rental listings in New York City if they are forced to remove listings subject to the rules (due to having to remove those listings without proper verification information). The court remained unconvinced of Airbnb’s argument of hardship in relation to the new rules. In its decision dismissing the case, the court made clear its position, stating:
“Of course, Airbnb has known about these rules for many months and has had ample opportunity to tell its hosts about these new rules and tell them to apply for a registration number. Nevertheless, it made no assertions in these papers that it has stopped or modified bookings for stays after the effective date of these rules. In other words, Airbnb cannot make little or no effort to tell its hosts to register and then complain that it might have to take down hundreds or thousands of listings because they are not registered. As the regulations relate to Airbnb, they give Airbnb a very simple way to make sure it is no longer facilitating – and making money from – unlawful activity. All Airbnb has to do is properly verify potential listings.”
Interested in other state court filings involving companies like Airbnb? Curious about recent state court decisions involving administrative law? Or perhaps a judge presiding over such cases? Check out Trellis. Trellis is an AI-driven, state trial court research and analytics platform. We make the fragmented US state trial court system searchable through a single interface by providing lawyers with analytical insights on judges, cases, and opposing counsel. Request a demo today and experience for yourself the ease of our analytics and API that provide you with the tools needed to streamline your legal practice.
