Kuehne & Nagel, Inc. v. Cargo Export Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kuehne & Nagel, Inc. v. Cargo Export Corp.

86 A.D.2d 501, 445 N.Y.S.2d 726, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15012

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

DecidedJanuary 5, 1982

StatusPublished

This text of 86 A.D.2d 501 (Kuehne & Nagel, Inc. v. Cargo Export Corp.) 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

Kuehne & Nagel, Inc. v. Cargo Export Corp., 86 A.D.2d 501, 445 N.Y.S.2d 726, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15012 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinions

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ostrau, J.), entered January 15, 1981, denying plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, is affirmed, without costs. The failure by plaintiff to bill the tenant for over four years for the taxes now claimed to have been periodically due during this period, and the acceptance of rent which did not include such taxes, raise sufficient questions so that we think it is safer not to grant final judgment on the present affidavits alone and the matter should be explored at a trial. With respect to the rights of the parties as to the one- and one-half month holdover, questions of credibility are presented as to whether there was an oral agreement covering such holdover. Concur — Ross, J. P., Lupiano, Silverman and Bloom, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ostrau, J.), entered January 15, 1981, denying plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, is affirmed, without costs. The failure by plaintiff to bill the tenant for over four years for the taxes now claimed to have been periodically due during this period, and the acceptance of rent which did not include such taxes, raise sufficient questions so that we think it is safer not to grant final judgment on the present affidavits alone and the matter should be explored at a trial. With respect to the rights of the parties as to the one- and one-half month holdover, questions of credibility are presented as to whether there was an oral agreement covering such holdover. Concur — Ross, J. P., Lupiano, Silverman and Bloom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

86 A.D.2d 501, 445 N.Y.S.2d 726, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15012, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kuehne-nagel-inc-v-cargo-export-corp-nyappdiv-1982.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack