New v. Liebeherr

121 N.Y.S. 236
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided February 18, 1910·Published

Opinion

SEABURY, J.

The plaintiff sued to recover rent due under a lease-on iSeptember 1, 1909. The defendant pleaded eviction. The acts • which are alleged to have constituted an eviction occurred subsequent to the time when the rent sued for was due.

[237] The rule is well settled that, to bar an action for rent, the eviction •must take place before the rent becomes due. Giles v. Comstock, 4 N. Y. 270, 53 Am. Dec. 374. In Giles v. Comstock, supra, the court •said:

“The doctrine everywhere running through the books is that, to render eviction from the premises a valid defense, it must have taken place before the rent became due.”

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. All concur.

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

New v. Liebeherr, 121 N.Y.S. 236 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1910).

121 N.Y.S. 236 (New v. Liebeherr) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Giles v. . Comstock
4 N.Y. 270 (New York Court of Appeals, 1850)