Mercantile Enterprises, Inc. v. Weaver

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mercantile Enterprises, Inc. v. Weaver

3 A.D.2d 932, 163 N.Y.S.2d 170, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5426

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

DecidedMay 20, 1957

StatusPublished

This text of 3 A.D.2d 932 (Mercantile Enterprises, Inc. v. Weaver) 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

Mercantile Enterprises, Inc. v. Weaver, 3 A.D.2d 932, 163 N.Y.S.2d 170, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5426 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding to review a determination of the State Rent Administrator, which affirmed the denial by a local rent administrator of an application for a certificate of eviction, the appeal is from an order denying the petition and dismissing the proceeding. Order unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. The building in question consists of three stories. The ground floor is occupied by a chain shoe store; the second floor apartment has been vacant for five years and. the third floor apartment is presently occupied by a tenant, whom the landlord seeks to evict. The basis for the application is that the landlord desires to withdraw only the housing accommodation of the building from the rental market because of the financial loss it incurs in renting.it, and because maintaining the services for this apartment imposes burdensome responsibilities which constitute a hardship. It appears that the total rental of the building yields a substantial profit, and that the landlord does not and is not reauired [933]*933to furnish any services to its commercial tenant. The State Rent Administrator’s determination was made on the grounds that a landlord may not withdraw part of the premises, and that the facts herein do not constitute a hardship. (State Rent and Eviction Regulations, § 59.) Present — Wenzel, Acting P. J., Beldoek, Ughetta, Hallinan and Kleinfeld, JJ. [See 4 A D 2d 700.]

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

In a proceeding to review a determination of the State Rent Administrator, which affirmed the denial by a local rent administrator of an application for a certificate of eviction, the appeal is from an order denying the petition and dismissing the proceeding. Order unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. The building in question consists of three stories. The ground floor is occupied by a chain shoe store; the second floor apartment has been vacant for five years and. the third floor apartment is presently occupied by a tenant, whom the landlord seeks to evict. The basis for the application is that the landlord desires to withdraw only the housing accommodation of the building from the rental market because of the financial loss it incurs in renting.it, and because maintaining the services for this apartment imposes burdensome responsibilities which constitute a hardship. It appears that the total rental of the building yields a substantial profit, and that the landlord does not and is not reauired [933]*933to furnish any services to its commercial tenant. The State Rent Administrator’s determination was made on the grounds that a landlord may not withdraw part of the premises, and that the facts herein do not constitute a hardship. (State Rent and Eviction Regulations, § 59.) Present — Wenzel, Acting P. J., Beldoek, Ughetta, Hallinan and Kleinfeld, JJ. [See 4 A D 2d 700.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 A.D.2d 932, 163 N.Y.S.2d 170, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5426, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mercantile-enterprises-inc-v-weaver-nyappdiv-1957.