Cardozo v. Borden

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Cardozo v. Borden

124 Misc. 508, 208 N.Y.S. 533, 1925 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 689

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedFebruary 27, 1925

StatusPublished

This text of 124 Misc. 508 (Cardozo v. Borden) 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

Cardozo v. Borden, 124 Misc. 508, 208 N.Y.S. 533, 1925 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 689 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The tenant holding under a lease received a notice from the landlord electing to terminate the lease on October 1, 1924. It contained a further provision that after that date the rent or the rental value would be $4,500 per year. The tenant refused to vacate and claims that the notice operated as a renewal of the lease. There is no basis whatever for such a claim. The tenant also rests upon the rent laws and the landlord counters by showing indisputably that a large part of the premises is rented out to various subtenants for various purposes and that the premises are not really being occupied by the tenant. The judgment dismissing the petition is clearly wrong and must be reversed. (Davies v. Aylan, 123 Misc. 932; Nystad & Krassner, Inc., v. Zerbe, 210 App. Div. 217.)

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with thirty dollars costs to the appellant to abide the event.

All concur; present, Guy, McCook and Proskauer, JJ.

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

Per Curiam:

The tenant holding under a lease received a notice from the landlord electing to terminate the lease on October 1, 1924. It contained a further provision that after that date the rent or the rental value would be $4,500 per year. The tenant refused to vacate and claims that the notice operated as a renewal of the lease. There is no basis whatever for such a claim. The tenant also rests upon the rent laws and the landlord counters by showing indisputably that a large part of the premises is rented out to various subtenants for various purposes and that the premises are not really being occupied by the tenant. The judgment dismissing the petition is clearly wrong and must be reversed. (Davies v. Aylan, 123 Misc. 932; Nystad & Krassner, Inc., v. Zerbe, 210 App. Div. 217.)

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with thirty dollars costs to the appellant to abide the event.

All concur; present, Guy, McCook and Proskauer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

124 Misc. 508, 208 N.Y.S. 533, 1925 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 689, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cardozo-v-borden-nyappterm-1925.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack