45 Maiden Lane, Inc. v. Reynolds Buffets, Inc.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

45 Maiden Lane, Inc. v. Reynolds Buffets, Inc.

143 Misc. 679, 257 N.Y.S. 105, 1932 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1064

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedApril 28, 1932

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 143 Misc. 679 (45 Maiden Lane, Inc. v. Reynolds Buffets, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

45 Maiden Lane, Inc. v. Reynolds Buffets, Inc., 143 Misc. 679, 257 N.Y.S. 105, 1932 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1064 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The intervenor, respondent, was not in possession of the premises, and could not properly intervene in these summary proceedings by virtue of the assignment of rents which was not intended as an assignment of the lease. (Erkins v. Tucker, 62 Misc. 495; 810 West End Avenue, Inc., v. Frankel, 113 id. 338.) Nor was it afforded a possessory interest in the premises by paying the judgment entered in favor of Liberty Place Holding Corporation, since it thereby became subrogated only to the rights and remedies of the judgment creditor in relation to the debt. On the other hand, the landlord, appellant, having assigned the rents, was no longer entitled to institute summary proceedings for the nonpayment of rent.

Final orders reversed, with thirty dollars costs to the tenant Reynolds Buffets, Inc., against the landlord, appellant, and the intervenor, respondent, and proceedings dismissed.

All concur; present, Levy; Callahan and Untermyer, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

The intervenor, respondent, was not in possession of the premises, and could not properly intervene in these summary proceedings by virtue of the assignment of rents which was not intended as an assignment of the lease. (Erkins v. Tucker, 62 Misc. 495; 810 West End Avenue, Inc., v. Frankel, 113 id. 338.) Nor was it afforded a possessory interest in the premises by paying the judgment entered in favor of Liberty Place Holding Corporation, since it thereby became subrogated only to the rights and remedies of the judgment creditor in relation to the debt. On the other hand, the landlord, appellant, having assigned the rents, was no longer entitled to institute summary proceedings for the nonpayment of rent.

Final orders reversed, with thirty dollars costs to the tenant Reynolds Buffets, Inc., against the landlord, appellant, and the intervenor, respondent, and proceedings dismissed.

All concur; present, Levy; Callahan and Untermyer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

143 Misc. 679, 257 N.Y.S. 105, 1932 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1064, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/45-maiden-lane-inc-v-reynolds-buffets-inc-nyappterm-1932.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack