Phoenix Garden Restaurant, Inc. v. Chu

202 A.D.2d 180, 608 N.Y.S.2d 205
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 1, 1994
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 202 A.D.2d 180 (Phoenix Garden Restaurant, Inc. v. Chu) 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
Phoenix Garden Restaurant, Inc. v. Chu, 202 A.D.2d 180, 608 N.Y.S.2d 205 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Opinion

—Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Beverly S. Cohen, J.), entered June 1, 1993, which, inter alia, denied appellants’ cross motion for use and occupancy pendente lite without prejudice, refused to direct the posting of an undertaking, and consolidated this action with a summary proceeding in Civil Court, New York County; and an order of the same court and Justice, entered November 29, 1993, which denied appellants’ motion for renewal, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Because the construction and renovation work of the landlord rendered the premises uninhabitable, which action was tantamount to an eviction, and appellants did not submit reports from municipal inspectors that the premises were safe to enter, the court properly denied the landlord use and occupancy without prejudice to the right to amend the petition in the summary proceeding. As the court denied plaintiff injunctive relief, no undertaking was required (CPLR 6312 [b]). Finally, consolidation was proper to avoid unnecessary duplication of trials, save unnecessary costs, and prevent the [181]*181possibility of injustice arising from divergent decisions based on the same facts (CPLR 602; Chinatown Apts. v New York City Tr. Auth., 100 AD2d 824, 825). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Kupferman, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.

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

Related

Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Bonilla
2023 NY Slip Op 00731 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
Matter of Kirkview Assoc. LP v. Amrock
2018 NY Slip Op 2389 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Murphy v. 317-319 Second Realty LLC
95 A.D.3d 443 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Cummin v. Cummin
56 A.D.2d 400 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Geneva Temps, Inc. v. New World Communities, Inc.
24 A.D.3d 332 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Kiladze v. Countrywide Insurance
10 A.D.3d 518 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Trump CPS L. L. P. v. Meyer
249 A.D.2d 22 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Moore v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N. A.
217 A.D.2d 419 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
202 A.D.2d 180, 608 N.Y.S.2d 205, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/phoenix-garden-restaurant-inc-v-chu-nyappdiv-1994.