Best v. Samjo Realty Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Best v. Samjo Realty Corp.

272 A.D.2d 188, 709 N.Y.S.2d 508, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5651

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

DecidedMay 16, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 272 A.D.2d 188 (Best v. Samjo 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

Best v. Samjo Realty Corp., 272 A.D.2d 188, 709 N.Y.S.2d 508, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5651 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louise Gruner Gans, J.), entered July 13, 1999, which, in an action for wrongful eviction, granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Giving plaintiff’s allegations every favorable intendment, his occupancy of the subject apartment was pursuant to a license that terminated along with his admittedly at-will employment as a porter in defendant’s building. Accordingly, plaintiff’s occupancy of the apartment could be terminated without a notice to quit (RPAPL 713 [11]), and indeed without any legal process whatsoever “so long as it [was] done without violence” (P & A Bros. v City of N. Y. Dept. of Parks & Recreation, 184 AD2d 267, 269). No claim of violence is made here, plaintiff having left his apartment voluntarily. We have considered plaintiff’s other arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur— Williams, J. P., Lerner, Rubin, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louise Gruner Gans, J.), entered July 13, 1999, which, in an action for wrongful eviction, granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Giving plaintiff’s allegations every favorable intendment, his occupancy of the subject apartment was pursuant to a license that terminated along with his admittedly at-will employment as a porter in defendant’s building. Accordingly, plaintiff’s occupancy of the apartment could be terminated without a notice to quit (RPAPL 713 [11]), and indeed without any legal process whatsoever “so long as it [was] done without violence” (P & A Bros. v City of N. Y. Dept. of Parks & Recreation, 184 AD2d 267, 269). No claim of violence is made here, plaintiff having left his apartment voluntarily. We have considered plaintiff’s other arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur— Williams, J. P., Lerner, Rubin, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

272 A.D.2d 188, 709 N.Y.S.2d 508, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5651, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/best-v-samjo-realty-corp-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack