Brambir v. Seifert
127 Misc. 603, 217 N.Y.S. 127, 1926 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1061
Opinion
We cannot assume that the 1924 amendment of section 1425 of the Civil Practice Act (added by Laws of 1921, chap. 199, as amd. by Laws of 1924, chap. 514), providing for judgment for rent, was intended, contrary to well-established principles, to warrant the entry of judgment for rent against a tenant not personally served with the precept or who had not appeared in the proceeding. .
Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs.
All concur; present, Bijur, O’Malley and Levy, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Brambir v. Seifert, 127 Misc. 603, 217 N.Y.S. 127, 1926 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1061 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1926).
127 Misc. 603 (Brambir v. Seifert) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Rosebud Owner LLC v. Sang Tan Park
2024 NY Slip Op 50151(U) (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2024)
Cornhill LLC v. Sposato
51 Misc. 3d 840 (Rochester City Court, 2016)
Expressway Village, Inc. v. Denman
26 Misc. 3d 954 (New York County Courts, 2009)
Avgush v. Berrahu
17 Misc. 3d 85 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Dolan v. Linnen
195 Misc. 2d 298 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 2003)
In re the Estate of Wickings
162 Misc. 357 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1937)
Witt-Stuart Realty Corp. v. Mantell
155 Misc. 165 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1935)
In re Wythe
150 Misc. 405 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1933)
Court Square Building, Inc. v. Harris
140 Misc. 542 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1931)
In re McDonald
225 A.D. 403 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1929)
McDonald v. Hutter
130 Misc. 631 (New York County Courts, 1927)