Halpern v. Bargans

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Halpern v. Bargans

46 A.D.2d 657, 359 N.Y.S.2d 837, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3976

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

DecidedOctober 15, 1974

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 46 A.D.2d 657 (Halpern v. Bargans) 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

Halpern v. Bargans, 46 A.D.2d 657, 359 N.Y.S.2d 837, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3976 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

In three consolidated actions to recover a total of five months’ rent under a lease and for damages, plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered April 2, 1974 after a non jury trial, in their favor in the amount of $338.10, representing rent for only the first month in question, plus an amount for incidental damages (cost of repainting and counsel fees) and less the amount of a security deposit, plus costs and disbursements. Judgment modified, on the law and the facts, by increasing the award of $338.10 to $2,041.94 and increasing the total recovery (including costs and disbursements) accordingly. As so modified, judgment affirmed, with costs to appellants against respondent. The trial court’s conclusion that appellants’ December, 1970 nonpayment dispossess proceeding terminated the tenant’s obligation to pay rent is negated by the provision in the lease that the rent obligation shall survive summary proceedings. Such a provision is valid (Mann v. Munch Brewery, 225 N. Y. 189; Rasch, New York Landlord & Tenant [2d ed.], § 785 et seq.). The lease was an exhibit at the trial. Absent a request by the trial court, and no issue as to presence or absence of' a survival clause in the lease having been raised, it was not incumbent upon plaintiffs’ counsel to call this clause to the specific attention of the trial court. Martuscello, Acting P. J., Latham, Christ, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

In three consolidated actions to recover a total of five months’ rent under a lease and for damages, plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered April 2, 1974 after a non jury trial, in their favor in the amount of $338.10, representing rent for only the first month in question, plus an amount for incidental damages (cost of repainting and counsel fees) and less the amount of a security deposit, plus costs and disbursements. Judgment modified, on the law and the facts, by increasing the award of $338.10 to $2,041.94 and increasing the total recovery (including costs and disbursements) accordingly. As so modified, judgment affirmed, with costs to appellants against respondent. The trial court’s conclusion that appellants’ December, 1970 nonpayment dispossess proceeding terminated the tenant’s obligation to pay rent is negated by the provision in the lease that the rent obligation shall survive summary proceedings. Such a provision is valid (Mann v. Munch Brewery, 225 N. Y. 189; Rasch, New York Landlord & Tenant [2d ed.], § 785 et seq.). The lease was an exhibit at the trial. Absent a request by the trial court, and no issue as to presence or absence of' a survival clause in the lease having been raised, it was not incumbent upon plaintiffs’ counsel to call this clause to the specific attention of the trial court. Martuscello, Acting P. J., Latham, Christ, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

46 A.D.2d 657, 359 N.Y.S.2d 837, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3976, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/halpern-v-bargans-nyappdiv-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack