People v. Pierson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Pierson

271 A.D.2d 936

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

DecidedJanuary 27, 1947

StatusPublished

This text of 271 A.D.2d 936 (People v. Pierson) 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

People v. Pierson, 271 A.D.2d 936 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1947).

Pincite

Opinion

Defendant, lessee of a building, appeals from a judgment of a city magistrate, holding a Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York, Borough of Brooklyn, convicting her of a violation of the Administrative Code, predicated upon the alleged use of said building as a furnished-room house without a proper certificate of occupancy therefor. Judgment reversed on the law and the facts, the information dismissed, and the fine remitted. In our opinion, the People failed to establish that the premises were used and occupied as a furnished-room house, within the definitions of that term as contained in subdivisions 2, 3 and 5 and paragraph (b) of subdivision 6 of section 4 of the Multiple Dwelling Law, then in effect. Lewis, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Adel and Nolan, JJ., concur.

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

Defendant, lessee of a building, appeals from a judgment of a city magistrate, holding a Court of Special Sessions of the City of New York, Borough of Brooklyn, convicting her of a violation of the Administrative Code, predicated upon the alleged use of said building as a furnished-room house without a proper certificate of occupancy therefor. Judgment reversed on the law and the facts, the information dismissed, and the fine remitted. In our opinion, the People failed to establish that the premises were used and occupied as a furnished-room house, within the definitions of that term as contained in subdivisions 2, 3 and 5 and paragraph (b) of subdivision 6 of section 4 of the Multiple Dwelling Law, then in effect. Lewis, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Adel and Nolan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 A.D.2d 936, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-pierson-nyappdiv-1947.