Catania v. 1401 Kearney Ave. Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Catania v. 1401 Kearney Ave. Corp.

78 A.D.2d 822, 434 N.Y.S.2d 651, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13502

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

DecidedNovember 20, 1980

StatusPublished

This text of 78 A.D.2d 822 (Catania v. 1401 Kearney Ave. Corp.) 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

Catania v. 1401 Kearney Ave. Corp., 78 A.D.2d 822, 434 N.Y.S.2d 651, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13502 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered August 29,1979, which granted the motion of defendant Cococcia for summary judgment and denied plaintiffs cross motion for the same relief, in this declaratory judgment action, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of further declaring that the lease between plaintiff and defendant 1401 Kearney Ave. Corp. is valid, and, as so modified, affirmed, with costs and disbursements to defendant-respondent. We adopt the rationale expressed by Special Term in finding and concluding that the lease at issue is valid. However, while Special Term in the judgment appropriately did not direct mere dismissal of the complaint, the judgment failed to specifically declare the rights of the parties in respect of the dispute invoked, and we modify so as to declare in favor of the defendant-intervenor Christopher Cococcia. Concur — Murphy, P.J., Ross, Markewich, Lupiano and Carro, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered August 29,1979, which granted the motion of defendant Cococcia for summary judgment and denied plaintiffs cross motion for the same relief, in this declaratory judgment action, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of further declaring that the lease between plaintiff and defendant 1401 Kearney Ave. Corp. is valid, and, as so modified, affirmed, with costs and disbursements to defendant-respondent. We adopt the rationale expressed by Special Term in finding and concluding that the lease at issue is valid. However, while Special Term in the judgment appropriately did not direct mere dismissal of the complaint, the judgment failed to specifically declare the rights of the parties in respect of the dispute invoked, and we modify so as to declare in favor of the defendant-intervenor Christopher Cococcia. Concur — Murphy, P.J., Ross, Markewich, Lupiano and Carro, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

78 A.D.2d 822, 434 N.Y.S.2d 651, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13502, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/catania-v-1401-kearney-ave-corp-nyappdiv-1980.