Perniciaro v. Veniero
This text of 90 N.Y.S. 369 (Perniciaro v. Veniero) 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.
Opinion
The landlords excluded the tenant from a substantial portion of the demised premises—a space about six feet square— and the evidence justified the finding that the act of exclusion was not compelled by the order of the building department, so far as to necessitate an interference with this tenant’s possession, assuming that compulsion would excuse the eviction. There is nothing to distinguish the [370]*370situation from that presented in Hamilton v. Graybill, 19 Misc. Rep. 521, 43 N. Y. Supp. 1079, and, under the rule applied in that case, the rent was suspended.
Final order affirmed, with costs. All concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
90 N.Y.S. 369, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/perniciaro-v-veniero-nyappterm-1904.