CIVIC ASS'N AT ROSLYN COUNTRY CLUB, INC. v. Levitt & Sons, Inc.

165 N.E.2d 206, 7 N.Y.2d 894, 197 N.Y.S.2d 203, 1960 N.Y. LEXIS 1545
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedJanuary 14, 1960
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 165 N.E.2d 206 (CIVIC ASS'N AT ROSLYN COUNTRY CLUB, INC. v. Levitt & Sons, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
CIVIC ASS'N AT ROSLYN COUNTRY CLUB, INC. v. Levitt & Sons, Inc., 165 N.E.2d 206, 7 N.Y.2d 894, 197 N.Y.S.2d 203, 1960 N.Y. LEXIS 1545 (N.Y. 1960).

Opinion

Judgment affirmed, without costs. The sales brochure, subdivision maps and commencement of performance by defendants of these representations are sufficient to estop them from denying the existence of easements for the use of this property for the recreational purposes on the terms described in the report of the Official Referee as modified by the Appellate Division (White v. La Due & Fitch, 303 N. Y. 122, 127-128; Phillips v. West Rockaway Land Co., 226 N. Y. 507; Hofmann v. Hofmann, 172 Misc. 378, affd. 259 App. Div. 820, mod. 283 N. Y. 730). The circumstance that the enjoyment of these privileges is conditioned upon payment of a sum of money to cover taxes, maintenance and operating expenses and a fair profit to the owner and operator of the club premises is not inconsistent with this result (Wilkinson v. Nassau Shores, 1 Misc 2d 917, affd. 278 App. Div. 970, mod. 304 N. Y. 614). No issue is raised concerning defendants ’ obligation to continue to operate this facility for any particular period of time, nor the extent of plaintiffs’ rights in event that operation is discontinued. We hold, without deciding those questions, that for so long as this facility is operated by defendants it must be operated on the terms above mentioned. No opinion.

Concur: Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Dye, Van Voorhis and Foster. Judges Fuld, Froessel and Burke dissent and vote to reverse the judgment appealed from insofar as it modifies the decree made by the Official Referee, dated May 16, 1958, and to reinstate said decree.

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

Related

Civic Ass'n at Roslyn Country Club, Inc. v. Levitt & Sons Inc.
192 A.D.2d 500 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
Civic Ass'n At Roslyn Country Club, Inc. v. Levitt
143 A.D.2d 385 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
Huggins v. Castle Estates Inc.
330 N.E.2d 48 (New York Court of Appeals, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
165 N.E.2d 206, 7 N.Y.2d 894, 197 N.Y.S.2d 203, 1960 N.Y. LEXIS 1545, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/civic-assn-at-roslyn-country-club-inc-v-levitt-sons-inc-ny-1960.