Claremont Gardens, Inc. v. Barker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claremont Gardens, Inc. v. Barker

282 A.D. 1068, 126 N.Y.S.2d 639, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5844

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

DecidedDecember 28, 1953

StatusPublished

This text of 282 A.D. 1068 (Claremont Gardens, Inc. v. Barker) 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

Claremont Gardens, Inc. v. Barker, 282 A.D. 1068, 126 N.Y.S.2d 639, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5844 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

Order directing the deputy commissioner of public works in charge of the bureau of buildings in the city of Mount Vernon to forthwith examine building plans and to issue a permit to build if the application - therefor complies with the pertinent ordinances, and for other relief, unanimously affirmed, without costs. The only question presented for determination is whether the respondent was qualified to make an application for a permit in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of the City of Mount Vernon. The .code provides that it must be liberally construed (§ 1.25). The definition of an “owner” embraces a “ purchaser ” and one having a contingent interest in the property. Presumably the framers of the code knew that a “purchaser ” ordinarily becomes the owner of property. [1069]*1069A consideration of all the persons embraced by the definition of an “ owner ” indicates that “ purchaser ” was intended to include a person entitled to become such. This respondent assumed the obligations of the contract and became an owner as defined by the code. Present— Nolan, P. J., Adel, MacCrate, Schmidt and Beldock, JJ.

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

Order directing the deputy commissioner of public works in charge of the bureau of buildings in the city of Mount Vernon to forthwith examine building plans and to issue a permit to build if the application - therefor complies with the pertinent ordinances, and for other relief, unanimously affirmed, without costs. The only question presented for determination is whether the respondent was qualified to make an application for a permit in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of the City of Mount Vernon. The .code provides that it must be liberally construed (§ 1.25). The definition of an “owner” embraces a “ purchaser ” and one having a contingent interest in the property. Presumably the framers of the code knew that a “purchaser ” ordinarily becomes the owner of property. [1069]*1069A consideration of all the persons embraced by the definition of an “ owner ” indicates that “ purchaser ” was intended to include a person entitled to become such. This respondent assumed the obligations of the contract and became an owner as defined by the code. Present— Nolan, P. J., Adel, MacCrate, Schmidt and Beldock, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

282 A.D. 1068, 126 N.Y.S.2d 639, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5844, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claremont-gardens-inc-v-barker-nyappdiv-1953.