Kaplan v. Sessler
This text of 197 Misc. 270 (Kaplan v. Sessler) 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.
Opinion
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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
197 Misc. 270, 97 N.Y.S.2d 642, 1950 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1684, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kaplan-v-sessler-nyappterm-1950.