Polk Arms, Inc. v. Kohler

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Polk Arms, Inc. v. Kohler

144 Misc. 326, 258 N.Y.S. 809, 1932 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1516

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJuly 18, 1932

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 144 Misc. 326 (Polk Arms, Inc. v. Kohler) 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.

Bluebook

Polk Arms, Inc. v. Kohler, 144 Misc. 326, 258 N.Y.S. 809, 1932 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1516 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The record indicates that the trial court found as matter of law that the noises emanating from the apartment overhead could not support the tenant’s claim of constructive eviction. (Seaboard Realty Co. v. Fuller, 33 Misc. 109.) In view of the pertinent provisions of the lease, including that which empowered the landlord to terminate conduct disturbing to the other occupants of the building, and the proof that here the landlord took no effective steps to remedy conditions after ample notice, we think sufficient facts were presented to require the court to pass on the merits of the defense. (Levine & Rosen v. Hence, App. Term, Oct. 1931.)

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with thirty dollars costs to appellant to abide the event.

All concur; present, Levy, Callahan and Untermyer, JJ.

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

Per Curiam.

The record indicates that the trial court found as matter of law that the noises emanating from the apartment overhead could not support the tenant’s claim of constructive eviction. (Seaboard Realty Co. v. Fuller, 33 Misc. 109.) In view of the pertinent provisions of the lease, including that which empowered the landlord to terminate conduct disturbing to the other occupants of the building, and the proof that here the landlord took no effective steps to remedy conditions after ample notice, we think sufficient facts were presented to require the court to pass on the merits of the defense. (Levine & Rosen v. Hence, App. Term, Oct. 1931.)

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with thirty dollars costs to appellant to abide the event.

All concur; present, Levy, Callahan and Untermyer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

144 Misc. 326, 258 N.Y.S. 809, 1932 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1516, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/polk-arms-inc-v-kohler-nyappterm-1932.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack