Electronic Corp. of America v. Famous Realty, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Electronic Corp. of America v. Famous Realty, Inc.

275 A.D.2d 859

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

DecidedMay 31, 1949

StatusPublished

This text of 275 A.D.2d 859 (Electronic Corp. of America v. Famous Realty, Inc.) 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

Electronic Corp. of America v. Famous Realty, Inc., 275 A.D.2d 859 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

The decision of the trial court that there is no basis for declaring that the tenant had any right to claim either constructive or actual eviction is amply supported by the evidence. (Thomson-Houston Elec. Co. V. Durant Land Improvement Co., 144 N. Y. 34; O’Brien v. Smith, 59 Hun 624, opinion in 13 N. Y. S. 408, affd. 129 N. Y, 620; Forshaw v. Hathaway, 112 Misc. 112; Drago v. Mead, 30 App. Div. 258.) There was no abuse of discretion in the refusal to grant specific performance. (Beck v. Allison, 56 N. Y. 366.) Plaintiff offered no evidence which warranted an award of larger damages. Johnston, Sneed, Wenzel and MaeCrate, JJ., concur; Nolan, P. J., dissents and votes to modify the judgment so as to provide for an award of damages to appellant on the basis of the concession on the trial, by the attorney for respondent, that damages might be assessed by means of an apportionment of rent.

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

The decision of the trial court that there is no basis for declaring that the tenant had any right to claim either constructive or actual eviction is amply supported by the evidence. (Thomson-Houston Elec. Co. V. Durant Land Improvement Co., 144 N. Y. 34; O’Brien v. Smith, 59 Hun 624, opinion in 13 N. Y. S. 408, affd. 129 N. Y, 620; Forshaw v. Hathaway, 112 Misc. 112; Drago v. Mead, 30 App. Div. 258.) There was no abuse of discretion in the refusal to grant specific performance. (Beck v. Allison, 56 N. Y. 366.) Plaintiff offered no evidence which warranted an award of larger damages. Johnston, Sneed, Wenzel and MaeCrate, JJ., concur; Nolan, P. J., dissents and votes to modify the judgment so as to provide for an award of damages to appellant on the basis of the concession on the trial, by the attorney for respondent, that damages might be assessed by means of an apportionment of rent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

275 A.D.2d 859, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/electronic-corp-of-america-v-famous-realty-inc-nyappdiv-1949.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack