Baum Residence Corp. v. Van Rosson
This text of 206 Misc. 314 (Baum Residence Corp. v. Van Rosson) 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.
Opinions
The trial judge should have granted the motion to dismiss made at the close of all the evidence. The bar against recovery of rent set forth in section 302 of the Multiple Dwelling Law; for the period during which a dwelling is occupied, when no certificate of occupancy as required by section 301 thereof has prior thereto been obtained, comprehends within its prohibition any action to recover for the use and occupation of the premises, however denominated. Such circumvention of the statute cannot be countenanced.
The judgment should be reversed, with $30 costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
206 Misc. 314, 134 N.Y.S.2d 302, 1954 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2519, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baum-residence-corp-v-van-rosson-nyappterm-1954.