Behr v. Dana Realty Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Behr v. Dana Realty Corp.

23 A.D.2d 638, 256 N.Y.S.2d 847, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4756

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 4, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 23 A.D.2d 638 (Behr v. Dana Realty Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Behr v. Dana Realty Corp., 23 A.D.2d 638, 256 N.Y.S.2d 847, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4756 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously reversed, on the law, with $50 costs to appellant, and the complaint dismissed. The defendant landlord is not in possession of the premises here involved, it having leased them to a tenant who is in possession. They are being maintained by the tenant for private rather than public use. The landlord would only be liable for injuries sustained on these premises due to a defective condition if it retained “ a measure of occupation and control over the leased premises” {Be Clara v. Barber S.S. Lines, 309 N. Y. 620, 628). It appearing that the landlord did not exercise such measure of control there was no duty arising from this defendant to the plaintiff. Accordingly, the complaint should be dismissed. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, McNally and Eager, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously reversed, on the law, with $50 costs to appellant, and the complaint dismissed. The defendant landlord is not in possession of the premises here involved, it having leased them to a tenant who is in possession. They are being maintained by the tenant for private rather than public use. The landlord would only be liable for injuries sustained on these premises due to a defective condition if it retained “ a measure of occupation and control over the leased premises” {Be Clara v. Barber S.S. Lines, 309 N. Y. 620, 628). It appearing that the landlord did not exercise such measure of control there was no duty arising from this defendant to the plaintiff. Accordingly, the complaint should be dismissed. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, McNally and Eager, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A.D.2d 638, 256 N.Y.S.2d 847, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4756, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/behr-v-dana-realty-corp-nyappdiv-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack