Dolan v. Dolan

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Dolan v. Dolan

125 Misc. 849, 211 N.Y.S. 507, 1925 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 952

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJanuary 22, 1925

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 125 Misc. 849 (Dolan v. Dolan) 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

Dolan v. Dolan, 125 Misc. 849, 211 N.Y.S. 507, 1925 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 952 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

Judgment unanimously reversed upon the law and new trial granted, with fifteen dollars costs to appellant to abide the event.

Under section 532 of the Real Property Law (as added by Laws of 1920, chap. 930), an action at law may be maintained by one joint tenant or one tenant in common against another to recover his just proportion of the rent where the tenant sued has received more than his just proportion. While a court of equity also has jurisdiction in such a case, its jurisdiction is concurrent and not exclusive. (Joslyn v. Joslyn, 9 Hun, 388-390; Wright v. Wright, 59 How. Pr. 176, 184; Coakley v. Mahar, 36 Hun, 157; Maekotter v. Maekotter, 74 Misc. 214, 216; Minion v. Warner, 185 App. Div. 246, 247; 238 N. Y. 413, 417, 418.)

Tenants by the entirety come within the foregoing rule. (Matter of Goodrich v. Village of Otego, 216 N. Y. 112, 117.)

Present: Cropsey, Lazansky and MacCrate, JJ.

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

Per Curiam:

Judgment unanimously reversed upon the law and new trial granted, with fifteen dollars costs to appellant to abide the event.

Under section 532 of the Real Property Law (as added by Laws of 1920, chap. 930), an action at law may be maintained by one joint tenant or one tenant in common against another to recover his just proportion of the rent where the tenant sued has received more than his just proportion. While a court of equity also has jurisdiction in such a case, its jurisdiction is concurrent and not exclusive. (Joslyn v. Joslyn, 9 Hun, 388-390; Wright v. Wright, 59 How. Pr. 176, 184; Coakley v. Mahar, 36 Hun, 157; Maekotter v. Maekotter, 74 Misc. 214, 216; Minion v. Warner, 185 App. Div. 246, 247; 238 N. Y. 413, 417, 418.)

Tenants by the entirety come within the foregoing rule. (Matter of Goodrich v. Village of Otego, 216 N. Y. 112, 117.)

Present: Cropsey, Lazansky and MacCrate, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

125 Misc. 849, 211 N.Y.S. 507, 1925 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 952, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dolan-v-dolan-nyappterm-1925.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack