Cafe Tokay, Inc. v. Chain Social Club, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cafe Tokay, Inc. v. Chain Social Club, Inc.

281 A.D. 955, 120 N.Y.S.2d 307

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

DecidedApril 7, 1953

StatusPublished

This text of 281 A.D. 955 (Cafe Tokay, Inc. v. Chain Social Club, Inc.) 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

Cafe Tokay, Inc. v. Chain Social Club, Inc., 281 A.D. 955, 120 N.Y.S.2d 307 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

By including “meeting room” with theatres, arenas and exhibition halls, the Legislature apparently intended that there be something public about a meeting room, as there is with respect to a theatre, stadium or exhibition hall. In this case the tenant’s [appellant’s] space is being put to a private use rather than a public or semipublic use. This court in a ruling on the 1949 amendment in the ease of 1481 Broadway (Jorp. v. Maiden Lane Ballroom, (277 Aup. Div. 870) said as follows: “unless the space occupied by a tenant falls within the precise definitions of what is a place of public assembly the emergency rent law is applicable.” The Court of Appeals affirmed this holding in 302 Hew York 850. Determination unanimously reversed, with costs to the appellant in all courts and the judgment of the trial court dismissing landlord’s [respondent’s] petition and granting a final order for the tenant reinstated. Present — Peek, P. J., Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.

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

By including “meeting room” with theatres, arenas and exhibition halls, the Legislature apparently intended that there be something public about a meeting room, as there is with respect to a theatre, stadium or exhibition hall. In this case the tenant’s [appellant’s] space is being put to a private use rather than a public or semipublic use. This court in a ruling on the 1949 amendment in the ease of 1481 Broadway (Jorp. v. Maiden Lane Ballroom, (277 Aup. Div. 870) said as follows: “unless the space occupied by a tenant falls within the precise definitions of what is a place of public assembly the emergency rent law is applicable.” The Court of Appeals affirmed this holding in 302 Hew York 850. Determination unanimously reversed, with costs to the appellant in all courts and the judgment of the trial court dismissing landlord’s [respondent’s] petition and granting a final order for the tenant reinstated. Present — Peek, P. J., Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

281 A.D. 955, 120 N.Y.S.2d 307, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cafe-tokay-inc-v-chain-social-club-inc-nyappdiv-1953.