Home/Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York/Lituchy v. Lathers

Lituchy v. Lathers

35 Misc. 2d 556, 232 N.Y.S.2d 627, 1962 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3135
CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
DecidedJune 14, 1962
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 35 Misc. 2d 556 (Lituchy v. Lathers) 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
Lituchy v. Lathers, 35 Misc. 2d 556, 232 N.Y.S.2d 627, 1962 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3135 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The term ‘ ‘ use ’ ’ of premises for illegal purposes implies doing of something customarily or habitually upon the premises. The evidence, therefore, must reveal customary and habitual illegal use of the premises by the tenant (U. C. L. Realty Co. v. Brown, 193 Misc. 801; Florgus Realty Corp. v. Reynolds, 123 Misc. 161; Tenement House Dept, of City of N. Y. v. McDevitt, 215 N. Y. 160; 167 East 86th St. Corp. v. Wienecke, 132 Misc. 491; Lazarowitz v. Kazan, 122 Misc. 202; Janowitz v. Jenkins, 8 Misc 2d 1077; Estate of Shaff v. Stein, 171 Misc. 376). The evidence by landlord here fell far short of establishing such use. The single, isolated conviction for possessing policy slips was not sufficient to establish that tenant was using the premises for an illegal purpose or use within the meaning of subdivision 5 of section 1410 of the Civil Practice Act or of subdivision 4 of section 52 of the State Rent and Eviction Regulations.

The final order should be reversed, with $30 costs, and final order directed in favor of tenant, with costs.

Concur — Hecht, J. P., Hofstadter, and Tilzer, JJ.

Final order reversed, etc.

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

Related

North Shore Associates v. Knox
180 Misc. 2d 1011 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1999)
Escalera v. New York Housing Authority
924 F. Supp. 1323 (S.D. New York, 1996)
1021-27 Avenue St. John Housing Development Fund Corp. v. Hernandez
154 Misc. 2d 141 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1992)
Grosfeld Realty Co. v. Lagares
150 Misc. 2d 22 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
Rowe v. Wells Fargo Realty Services, Inc.
166 Cal. App. 3d 310 (California Court of Appeal, 1985)
Deutsch v. Phillips Petroleum Co.
56 Cal. App. 3d 586 (California Court of Appeal, 1976)
Humane Society v. Joad Enterprises, Inc.
65 Misc. 2d 8 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1970)
Cohen v. Carroll
63 Misc. 2d 222 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1970)
190 Stanton Inc. v. Santiago
60 Misc. 2d 224 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1969)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
35 Misc. 2d 556, 232 N.Y.S.2d 627, 1962 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3135, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lituchy-v-lathers-nyappterm-1962.