Foisy v. Peavey

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Foisy v. Peavey

186 Misc. 721, 61 N.Y.S.2d 710, 1946 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2130

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMarch 7, 1946

StatusPublished

This text of 186 Misc. 721 (Foisy v. Peavey) 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

Foisy v. Peavey, 186 Misc. 721, 61 N.Y.S.2d 710, 1946 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2130 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1946).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum Per Curiam.

In the absence of evidence by a rooming house proprietor that he was renting the same number of rooms or units on a monthly basis as> of the maximum rent date, the same term of occupancy for a unit must be continued as existed on that date. (Rent Regulation for Hotels and Rooming Houses in the New York City Defense-Rental Area, § 2, subd. [b], par. [2]; 8 Federal Register 13911, as amd.) In determining the applicable rate per person, a child must be considered as a person. The overcharge is the difference between the $18 per week and $68 per month for the period of occupancy, namely, $44. Attorney’s fees will only be allowed for the appeal. None were pleaded below or proved on the trial.

The judgment should be reversed, with $30 costs, and judgment directed for plaintiff for $132, together with $30, attorney’s fees allowed on the appeal.

The appeal from the orders should be dismissed.

Hammer, Sheintag and Hecht, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed, etc.

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

Memorandum Per Curiam.

In the absence of evidence by a rooming house proprietor that he was renting the same number of rooms or units on a monthly basis as> of the maximum rent date, the same term of occupancy for a unit must be continued as existed on that date. (Rent Regulation for Hotels and Rooming Houses in the New York City Defense-Rental Area, § 2, subd. [b], par. [2]; 8 Federal Register 13911, as amd.) In determining the applicable rate per person, a child must be considered as a person. The overcharge is the difference between the $18 per week and $68 per month for the period of occupancy, namely, $44. Attorney’s fees will only be allowed for the appeal. None were pleaded below or proved on the trial.

The judgment should be reversed, with $30 costs, and judgment directed for plaintiff for $132, together with $30, attorney’s fees allowed on the appeal.

The appeal from the orders should be dismissed.

Hammer, Sheintag and Hecht, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 Misc. 721, 61 N.Y.S.2d 710, 1946 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2130, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/foisy-v-peavey-nyappterm-1946.