Emray Realty Corp. v. Jackson

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Emray Realty Corp. v. Jackson

12 Misc. 2d 62, 174 N.Y.S.2d 618, 1958 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3209

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMay 28, 1958

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 12 Misc. 2d 62 (Emray Realty Corp. v. Jackson) 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

Emray Realty Corp. v. Jackson, 12 Misc. 2d 62, 174 N.Y.S.2d 618, 1958 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3209 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Summary proceedings were designed to provide i lie landlord with a simple, expeditious, and inexpensive means of regaining possession of his premises for nonpayment of rent. The proceedings should not be so hypercritically restricted as to destroy the very remedy which they are designed to afford. (Reich v. Cochran, 201 N. Y. 450.)

The cases following Reich v. Cochran (supra) have indicated a clear trend to disregard picayune objections which involve trivial errors not affecting substantial rights of the tenant. The failure to sign the copy of the petition served upon the tenant is not a jurisdictional defect requiring the dismissal of the petition particularly when the original petition on file with the clerk of the court is correct in all respects.

An omission such as resulted in the dismissal of the petition here is in that category of defects which have been held amendable and it was error for the court to dismiss the petition even though said dismissal was without prejudice.

The order should be reversed, with $10 costs, and motion to dismiss petition denied.

Hoestadteb, J. P., Heoht and Tilzeb, JJ., concur.

Order reversed, etc.

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