Kaplan v. Sessler

197 Misc. 270, 97 N.Y.S.2d 642, 1950 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1684
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided March 9, 1950·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The maintenance of a television aerial or wire running from a window of respondents’ apartments to the roof of the premises was, under the circumstances disclosed, an intrusion or squatting upon the landlords ’ property within the purview of section 1411 of the Civil Practice Act (Goldstein v. Alweiss, 196 Misc. 513, and reports therein cited; see, also, Joan Building Corp. v. Gould, 276 App. Div. 765).

The final orders should be unanimously reversed upon the law, with $30 costs to landlords, and final orders directed for landlords as prayed for in the petitions.

Steinbbink, Rubenstein and Golden, JJ., concur.

Final orders reversed, etc.

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

Kaplan v. Sessler, 197 Misc. 270, 97 N.Y.S.2d 642, 1950 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1684 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1950).

197 Misc. 270 (Kaplan v. Sessler) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Urban Horizons Tax Credit Fund, L.P. v. Zarick
195 Misc. 2d 779 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 2003)
Dudic Holding Corp. v. Feinstein
205 Misc. 42 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1953)
5411 Realty Corp. v. Morse
200 Misc. 961 (New York Supreme Court, 1951)