Emanuel v. Herman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Emanuel v. Herman

13 A.D.2d 520, 212 N.Y.S.2d 115, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12125

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

DecidedMarch 13, 1961

StatusPublished

This text of 13 A.D.2d 520 (Emanuel v. Herman) 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

Emanuel v. Herman, 13 A.D.2d 520, 212 N.Y.S.2d 115, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12125 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding by a landlord under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act, to review determinations of the State Rent Administrator made December 10, 1959, and August 19, 1960, that the subject apartment is not exempt from control, the landlord appeals from: (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 19, 1960, denying his petition and dismissing the proceeding; and (2) an order.of said court (described in the notice of appeal as an “intermediate order”), dated August 5, 1960, remitting the proceeding to the State Rent Administrator for further consideration. Order dated October 19,1960, affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Appeal from order dated August 5, 1960, dismissed, without costs. Since the subsequent application to review the determination following the remission, was a new and independent proceeding, the order of remission dated August 5, 1960, was a final determination and appealable (Matter of Bornscheuer v. Corbett, 6 A D 2d 835, affd. 5 N Y 2d 973; cf. Matter of North Amer. Holding Corp. v. Murdock, 6 A D 2d 596). The notice of appeal herein is dated October 19, 1960, hence it is not timely with respect to said order. Beldock, Acting P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding by a landlord under article 78 of the Civil Practice Act, to review determinations of the State Rent Administrator made December 10, 1959, and August 19, 1960, that the subject apartment is not exempt from control, the landlord appeals from: (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 19, 1960, denying his petition and dismissing the proceeding; and (2) an order.of said court (described in the notice of appeal as an “intermediate order”), dated August 5, 1960, remitting the proceeding to the State Rent Administrator for further consideration. Order dated October 19,1960, affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Appeal from order dated August 5, 1960, dismissed, without costs. Since the subsequent application to review the determination following the remission, was a new and independent proceeding, the order of remission dated August 5, 1960, was a final determination and appealable (Matter of Bornscheuer v. Corbett, 6 A D 2d 835, affd. 5 N Y 2d 973; cf. Matter of North Amer. Holding Corp. v. Murdock, 6 A D 2d 596). The notice of appeal herein is dated October 19, 1960, hence it is not timely with respect to said order. Beldock, Acting P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 A.D.2d 520, 212 N.Y.S.2d 115, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12125, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/emanuel-v-herman-nyappdiv-1961.