Perniciaro v. Veniero

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Perniciaro v. Veniero

90 N.Y.S. 369

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided November 10, 1904·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

BISCHOFF, J.

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] situation 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.

Footnotes

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

BISCHOFF, J.

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] situation 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.

Footnotes

Perniciaro v. Veniero, 90 N.Y.S. 369 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1904).

Pincite

90 N.Y.S. 369 (Perniciaro v. Veniero) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Footnotes

Related