Buchfuhrer v. Tantleff

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Buchfuhrer v. Tantleff

200 Misc. 1117, 112 N.Y.S.2d 69, 1952 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2606

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJanuary 10, 1952

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 200 Misc. 1117 (Buchfuhrer v. Tantleff) 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.

Bluebook

Buchfuhrer v. Tantleff, 200 Misc. 1117, 112 N.Y.S.2d 69, 1952 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2606 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1952).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Tenant’s installation of the television antenna without landlord’s permission constituted a violation of a covenant of the lease. This covenant was projected into the statutory tenancy under which tenant presently occupies the apartment. The violation, however, is not so substantial as to warrant tenant’s eviction from the apartment (Matter of Park East Land Corp v. Finkelstein, 299 N. Y. 70). Landlord has other remedies, less drastic but fully adequate to compel the tenant to remove the aerial.

The final order should be unanimously reversed on the law, with $30 costs to tenant, and petition dismissed, with appropriate costs in the court below. This is without prejudice to any other action or proceeding landlord may be advised to institute to compel the tenant to remove the television aerial.

Fennelly, Coldest and Beldook, JJ., concur.

Final order reversed, etc.

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

Per Curiam.

Tenant’s installation of the television antenna without landlord’s permission constituted a violation of a covenant of the lease. This covenant was projected into the statutory tenancy under which tenant presently occupies the apartment. The violation, however, is not so substantial as to warrant tenant’s eviction from the apartment (Matter of Park East Land Corp v. Finkelstein, 299 N. Y. 70). Landlord has other remedies, less drastic but fully adequate to compel the tenant to remove the aerial.

The final order should be unanimously reversed on the law, with $30 costs to tenant, and petition dismissed, with appropriate costs in the court below. This is without prejudice to any other action or proceeding landlord may be advised to institute to compel the tenant to remove the television aerial.

Fennelly, Coldest and Beldook, JJ., concur.

Final order reversed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

200 Misc. 1117, 112 N.Y.S.2d 69, 1952 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2606, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/buchfuhrer-v-tantleff-nyappterm-1952.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack