Feinsilver v. Conrad

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Feinsilver v. Conrad

9 A.D.2d 769, 192 N.Y.S.2d 673, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6293

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

DecidedNovember 9, 1959

StatusPublished

This text of 9 A.D.2d 769 (Feinsilver v. Conrad) 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

Feinsilver v. Conrad, 9 A.D.2d 769, 192 N.Y.S.2d 673, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6293 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action by a lessee of real property against the lessor to recover damages for fraud and breach of warranty, and to recover back the security deposited under the lease on the theory of conversion, the appeal is (1) from a judgment entered after trial before the court without a jury in favor of the lessee, and (2) from an order denying the lessor’s motion for a new trial and for other relief. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs, and order unanimously affirmed, without costs. The lessor, appellant herein, expressly warranted that the use of the demised premises as a used car lot was permissible. The warranty was false. Recovery of damages thereon was proper-even though the lease for the nonpermitted use was illegal. (Municipal Metallic Bed Mfg. Corp. v. Dobbs, 253 1ST. T. 313.) The proof as to the conversion of the security by the appellant was ample. Present — Wenzel, Acting P. J., Beldoek, Murphy, Hallinan and Kleinfeld, JJ.

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

In an action by a lessee of real property against the lessor to recover damages for fraud and breach of warranty, and to recover back the security deposited under the lease on the theory of conversion, the appeal is (1) from a judgment entered after trial before the court without a jury in favor of the lessee, and (2) from an order denying the lessor’s motion for a new trial and for other relief. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs, and order unanimously affirmed, without costs. The lessor, appellant herein, expressly warranted that the use of the demised premises as a used car lot was permissible. The warranty was false. Recovery of damages thereon was proper-even though the lease for the nonpermitted use was illegal. (Municipal Metallic Bed Mfg. Corp. v. Dobbs, 253 1ST. T. 313.) The proof as to the conversion of the security by the appellant was ample. Present — Wenzel, Acting P. J., Beldoek, Murphy, Hallinan and Kleinfeld, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

9 A.D.2d 769, 192 N.Y.S.2d 673, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6293, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/feinsilver-v-conrad-nyappdiv-1959.