Erit Realty Corp. v. Sea Gate Ass'n

234 A.D. 888
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Erit Realty Corp. v. Sea Gate Ass'n. Read the opinion of the Court — 234 A.D. 196

Opinion

— Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. The main grievance of plaintiff in the prior action involving rights in the streets of Sea Gate was that plaintiff was not permitted to have free use of the Sea Gate avenue entrance. It was so found by the trial court. The same condition existed at the time of the trial. By its order, this court meant to leave the situation in respect of the Sea Gate avenue gates as it was at the time of the commencement of the action and at the time of trial. Were there justification for plaintiff’s claim that the judgment finally entered in the prior action gave to it the right to enter and leave Sea Gate by the Sea Gate avenue gates, its remedy would not be by action. Furthermore, we are of opinion that limiting plaintiff to entrance to Sea Gate by way of the West Thirty-seventh street entrance is a reasonable regulation. Present—'Lazansky, P. J., Young, Kapper, Hagarty and Tompkins, JJ. Settle order on notice.

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

Erit Realty Corp. v. Sea Gate Ass'n, 234 A.D. 888 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1931).

234 A.D. 888 (Erit Realty Corp. v. Sea Gate Ass'n) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.