East 35th Street Real Estate Associates v. 24535 Owners Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

East 35th Street Real Estate Associates v. 24535 Owners Corp.

175 A.D.2d 42, 573 N.Y.S.2d 893, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10028

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

DecidedJuly 11, 1991

StatusPublished

This text of 175 A.D.2d 42 (East 35th Street Real Estate Associates v. 24535 Owners 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

East 35th Street Real Estate Associates v. 24535 Owners Corp., 175 A.D.2d 42, 573 N.Y.S.2d 893, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10028 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County (William J. Davis, J.), entered on or about June 8, 1990, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and denied plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of denying defendant’s motion and reinstating the verified complaint and, as so modified, the order is otherwise affirmed, with costs.

Pursuant to Article 9 of the lease and Article 43 of the rider, defendant-landlord is responsible for any structural repairs necessitated by the fire. The court’s reliance upon the damage report prepared for plaintiff’s insurer was misplaced since such report, by the terms of plaintiff’s fire insurance policy, was limited to personal property losses. There exist questions of fact as to whether there was any structural damage to the premises. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Kupferman and Smith, JJ.

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

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County (William J. Davis, J.), entered on or about June 8, 1990, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and denied plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of denying defendant’s motion and reinstating the verified complaint and, as so modified, the order is otherwise affirmed, with costs.

Pursuant to Article 9 of the lease and Article 43 of the rider, defendant-landlord is responsible for any structural repairs necessitated by the fire. The court’s reliance upon the damage report prepared for plaintiff’s insurer was misplaced since such report, by the terms of plaintiff’s fire insurance policy, was limited to personal property losses. There exist questions of fact as to whether there was any structural damage to the premises. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Kupferman and Smith, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

175 A.D.2d 42, 573 N.Y.S.2d 893, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10028, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/east-35th-street-real-estate-associates-v-24535-owners-corp-nyappdiv-1991.