Home/City of New York Municipal Court/Ostend Realty Corp. v. Lehman

Ostend Realty Corp. v. Lehman

204 Misc. 234, 127 N.Y.S.2d 339, 1953 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2562
CourtCity of New York Municipal Court
DecidedJuly 22, 1953
StatusPublished

This text of 204 Misc. 234 (Ostend Realty Corp. v. Lehman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering City of New York Municipal Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ostend Realty Corp. v. Lehman, 204 Misc. 234, 127 N.Y.S.2d 339, 1953 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2562 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1953).

Opinion

Hookebt, J.

Petition is dismissed as the landlord, a corporation, does not appear by an attorney as required by section 236 of the Civil Practice Act (Hillside Housing Corp. v. Eisenberger, 173 Misc. 75). The petition has no mention of an attorney. An attorney whose name appears on the precept without designating him as an attorney is insufficient to comply with the statute. There is no proof submitted by the landlord corporation that it has an attorney and/or commenced this proceeding by an attorney. (Gaston & Co. v. All Russian Zemsky Union, 221 App. Div. 732.) The question is properly raised by a special appearance of the tenant and the petition is hereby dismissed.

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

Related

Gaston & Co. v. All Russian Zemsky Union
221 A.D. 732 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1927)
Hillside Housing Corp. v. Eisenberger
173 Misc. 75 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1939)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
204 Misc. 234, 127 N.Y.S.2d 339, 1953 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2562, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ostend-realty-corp-v-lehman-nynyccityct-1953.