Philip Realty & Construction Co. v. Chubin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Philip Realty & Construction Co. v. Chubin

135 A.D. 766, 119 N.Y.S. 924, 1909 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4059

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

DecidedDecember 10, 1909

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 135 A.D. 766 (Philip Realty & Construction Co. v. Chubin) 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

Philip Realty & Construction Co. v. Chubin, 135 A.D. 766, 119 N.Y.S. 924, 1909 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4059 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

Rich, J.:

The petition herein was made by one Lei'zerkowitz, claiming to be an authorized agent- of the Philip Realty and Construction Company, which was alleged to be the owner of the property ,and the. appéllant’s landlord, under a written agreement, by which . the appellant leased of said company on April 1, 1909^ the premises he^ was in possession of, and agreed to pay said company rent therefor of .fifteen dollars a. month in advance, and it is claimed that he was in default for the month of May. These allegations of the petition being denied, it was incumbent upon the company to establish them by evidence upon the trial before it was entitled to judgment. - No proof of ownership or of the making of' any lease with the appellant was made, and the refusal of the Municipal Court'justice to dismiss the petition upon appellantis motion when the respondent rested its case was error.

The judgment of the Municipal Court should be reversed and a new trial ordered, costs to abide the event.

Woodward, Jenks, Burr and Miller, JJ., concurred.

Judgment of the Municipal Court reversed and new trial ordered, costs to abide the event. ' ■

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

Rich, J.:

The petition herein was made by one Lei'zerkowitz, claiming to be an authorized agent- of the Philip Realty and Construction Company, which was alleged to be the owner of the property ,and the. appéllant’s landlord, under a written agreement, by which . the appellant leased of said company on April 1, 1909^ the premises he^ was in possession of, and agreed to pay said company rent therefor of .fifteen dollars a. month in advance, and it is claimed that he was in default for the month of May. These allegations of the petition being denied, it was incumbent upon the company to establish them by evidence upon the trial before it was entitled to judgment. - No proof of ownership or of the making of' any lease with the appellant was made, and the refusal of the Municipal Court'justice to dismiss the petition upon appellantis motion when the respondent rested its case was error.

The judgment of the Municipal Court should be reversed and a new trial ordered, costs to abide the event.

Woodward, Jenks, Burr and Miller, JJ., concurred.

Judgment of the Municipal Court reversed and new trial ordered, costs to abide the event. ' ■

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

135 A.D. 766, 119 N.Y.S. 924, 1909 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4059, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/philip-realty-construction-co-v-chubin-nyappdiv-1909.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack