Boylan v. 1986 Grand Avenue Realty Corp.

City of New York Municipal Court

Boylan v. 1986 Grand Avenue Realty Corp.

169 Misc. 881, 8 N.Y.S.2d 200, 1938 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2175

CourtCity of New York Municipal Court

DecidedDecember 12, 1938

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 169 Misc. 881 (Boylan v. 1986 Grand Avenue Realty Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering City of New York Municipal Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Boylan v. 1986 Grand Avenue Realty Corp., 169 Misc. 881, 8 N.Y.S.2d 200, 1938 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2175 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

Schackno, J.

This action was tried upon the theory that the defendant landlord failed to comply with the provisions of section 78 of the Multiple Dwelling Law, in that it neglected to replace a rope of a clothes drier in the demised premises, after the defect therein had been called to the attention of the defendant. There is no question about the fact that plaintiff was injured nor that the defendant had notice of the defective condition. The clothes drier was not a part of the structure (Kitchen v. Landy, 215 App. Div. 586; Cooperman v. Anderson, 158 Misc. 155; Fleming v. Oppel, 300 N. Y. Supp. 588; Israel v. Toonkel, 134 Misc. 327); no duty rested on the defendant to keep it in repair (Liddell v. Novak, 246 App. Div. 848). It is true that improvements are made in the maintenance of multiple dwellings and that such improvements are required by tenants and for them landlords exact additional rentals; the statute cannot, however, be enlarged by reason thereof. Judgment for defendant.

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

Schackno, J.

This action was tried upon the theory that the defendant landlord failed to comply with the provisions of section 78 of the Multiple Dwelling Law, in that it neglected to replace a rope of a clothes drier in the demised premises, after the defect therein had been called to the attention of the defendant. There is no question about the fact that plaintiff was injured nor that the defendant had notice of the defective condition. The clothes drier was not a part of the structure (Kitchen v. Landy, 215 App. Div. 586; Cooperman v. Anderson, 158 Misc. 155; Fleming v. Oppel, 300 N. Y. Supp. 588; Israel v. Toonkel, 134 Misc. 327); no duty rested on the defendant to keep it in repair (Liddell v. Novak, 246 App. Div. 848). It is true that improvements are made in the maintenance of multiple dwellings and that such improvements are required by tenants and for them landlords exact additional rentals; the statute cannot, however, be enlarged by reason thereof. Judgment for defendant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

169 Misc. 881, 8 N.Y.S.2d 200, 1938 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2175, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boylan-v-1986-grand-avenue-realty-corp-nynyccityct-1938.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack