Hankin v. Armstrong

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Hankin v. Armstrong

113 Misc. 2d 24, 451 N.Y.S.2d 334, 1981 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3456

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedDecember 29, 1981

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 113 Misc. 2d 24 (Hankin v. Armstrong) 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

Hankin v. Armstrong, 113 Misc. 2d 24, 451 N.Y.S.2d 334, 1981 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3456 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Final judgments unanimously modified by granting that part of tenants’ motions to consolidate the proceedings, vacating the award of costs and disbursements to the landlord in each of the separate proceedings herein and by substituting one bill of costs and disbursements in favor of the landlord and by remanding the matter to the court below for appropriate entry of said charges, and, as so modified, final judgments affirmed, with $25 costs on appeal to the tenants.

We affirm the findings of the trial court that landlord did not comply with the provisions of section 233 of the Real Property Law when it. offered tenants illusory leases to [25]*25sign. Moreover, we find that the late charges were unreasonable and in the nature of a penalty and, therefore, were not enforceable (Truck Rent-A-Center v Puritan Farms 2nd, 41 NY2d 420, 423-424; 14 NY Jur, Damages, § 155 et seq.). Finally, the issues herein were identical and the court erred in not consolidating them prior to rendering its determination.

Farley, P. J., Slifkin and Geiler, JJ., concur.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Final judgments unanimously modified by granting that part of tenants’ motions to consolidate the proceedings, vacating the award of costs and disbursements to the landlord in each of the separate proceedings herein and by substituting one bill of costs and disbursements in favor of the landlord and by remanding the matter to the court below for appropriate entry of said charges, and, as so modified, final judgments affirmed, with $25 costs on appeal to the tenants.

We affirm the findings of the trial court that landlord did not comply with the provisions of section 233 of the Real Property Law when it. offered tenants illusory leases to [25]*25sign. Moreover, we find that the late charges were unreasonable and in the nature of a penalty and, therefore, were not enforceable (Truck Rent-A-Center v Puritan Farms 2nd, 41 NY2d 420, 423-424; 14 NY Jur, Damages, § 155 et seq.). Finally, the issues herein were identical and the court erred in not consolidating them prior to rendering its determination.

Farley, P. J., Slifkin and Geiler, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

113 Misc. 2d 24, 451 N.Y.S.2d 334, 1981 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3456, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hankin-v-armstrong-nyappterm-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack