Newhouse Properties, Inc. v. McGee

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Newhouse Properties, Inc. v. McGee

139 A.D.2d 923, 528 N.Y.S.2d 240, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4269

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

DecidedApril 8, 1988

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 139 A.D.2d 923 (Newhouse Properties, Inc. v. McGee) 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

Newhouse Properties, Inc. v. McGee, 139 A.D.2d 923, 528 N.Y.S.2d 240, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4269 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment insofar as appealed from unanimously reversed on the law without costs, in accordance with the following memorandum: The County Court lacked jurisdiction to grant the equitable relief awarded respondent in this RPAPL article 7 summary proceeding. County Court possesses limited jurisdiction and may exercise equity power only to the extent specifically provided by law (NY Const, art VI, § 11 [b]; Judiciary Law §§ 190, 190-b; see, Matter of Hill v Marks, 124 AD2d 445). Moreover, respondent did not request such equitable relief in his answer. Additionally, the object of an RPAPL article 7 summary proceeding is to resolve questions affecting possession of real property promptly, not to determine equitable questions of title (see, Tivoli Assocs. v Wing, 122 Mise 2d 901, 902-903). In view of our holding, we do not reach the remaining issues raised by respondent. (Appeal [924]*924from judgment of Erie County Court, La Mendola, J. — eviction.) Present — Doerr, J. P., Boomer, Green, Lawton and Davis, JJ.

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

— Judgment insofar as appealed from unanimously reversed on the law without costs, in accordance with the following memorandum: The County Court lacked jurisdiction to grant the equitable relief awarded respondent in this RPAPL article 7 summary proceeding. County Court possesses limited jurisdiction and may exercise equity power only to the extent specifically provided by law (NY Const, art VI, § 11 [b]; Judiciary Law §§ 190, 190-b; see, Matter of Hill v Marks, 124 AD2d 445). Moreover, respondent did not request such equitable relief in his answer. Additionally, the object of an RPAPL article 7 summary proceeding is to resolve questions affecting possession of real property promptly, not to determine equitable questions of title (see, Tivoli Assocs. v Wing, 122 Mise 2d 901, 902-903). In view of our holding, we do not reach the remaining issues raised by respondent. (Appeal [924]*924from judgment of Erie County Court, La Mendola, J. — eviction.) Present — Doerr, J. P., Boomer, Green, Lawton and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

139 A.D.2d 923, 528 N.Y.S.2d 240, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4269, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/newhouse-properties-inc-v-mcgee-nyappdiv-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack