Olicrom Operating Corp. v. Hirschberg

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Olicrom Operating Corp. v. Hirschberg

185 Misc. 281, 56 N.Y.S.2d 622, 1945 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2077

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJuly 9, 1945

StatusPublished

This text of 185 Misc. 281 (Olicrom Operating Corp. v. Hirschberg) 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

Olicrom Operating Corp. v. Hirschberg, 185 Misc. 281, 56 N.Y.S.2d 622, 1945 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2077 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1945).

Pincite

Opinion

Memobaudum Per Curiam.

The tenant did not claim any fraud or duréss in the execution of the lease. Under its terms occupancy was provided for four people and the rent fixed was predicated thereon. The fact that subsequently only two people occupied the apartment does not mean that the tenant was entitled to a lower rental on the basis of two-person occupancy. The rent as fixed for four-person occupancy is within the Office of .Price Administration ceiling regulation (Rent Regu[283]*283lation for Hotels and Rooming Houses in New York City Defense-Rental Area, 8 Fed. Reg. 13910).

The final order should be modified by determining that the rent due is the sum of $208.34 and by directing judgment for said sum with interest and costs and as modified affirmed, with $25 costs to appellant.

Hammer, Shientag and Eder, JJ., concur.

Ordered accordingly.

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

Memobaudum Per Curiam.

The tenant did not claim any fraud or duréss in the execution of the lease. Under its terms occupancy was provided for four people and the rent fixed was predicated thereon. The fact that subsequently only two people occupied the apartment does not mean that the tenant was entitled to a lower rental on the basis of two-person occupancy. The rent as fixed for four-person occupancy is within the Office of .Price Administration ceiling regulation (Rent Regu[283]*283lation for Hotels and Rooming Houses in New York City Defense-Rental Area, 8 Fed. Reg. 13910).

The final order should be modified by determining that the rent due is the sum of $208.34 and by directing judgment for said sum with interest and costs and as modified affirmed, with $25 costs to appellant.

Hammer, Shientag and Eder, JJ., concur.

Ordered accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

185 Misc. 281, 56 N.Y.S.2d 622, 1945 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2077, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/olicrom-operating-corp-v-hirschberg-nyappterm-1945.