Polvino Construction Co. v. Lawrence

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Polvino Construction Co. v. Lawrence

171 A.D.2d 1080

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

DecidedMarch 8, 1991

StatusPublished

This text of 171 A.D.2d 1080 (Polvino Construction Co. v. Lawrence) 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

Polvino Construction Co. v. Lawrence, 171 A.D.2d 1080 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Order and judgment unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: In this landlord-tenant proceeding, respondents appeal from an order and judgment which summarily awarded petitioner a warrant of eviction and a money judgment in the principal amount of $3,400, representing unpaid rent of $200 per month. Respondents contend that there are triable questions of fact with respect to the validity of petitioner’s deed to the property and whether respondents are obligated to pay rent.

Summary judgment was properly granted to petitioner because respondents’ conclusory assertions were insufficient to raise triable questions of fact. Despite conveying the property to petitioner under an agreement that expressly provided that respondents were , to retain no interest therein, respondents have remained in possession for over three years and have paid no rent. Objectively viewed, the uncontroverted proof warrants the inference that the parties intended to assume the relation of landlord and tenant (see, 14 Carmody-Wait 2d, NY Prac § 90:137, at 108), that respondents have occupied the premises as tenants, and that they expressly or implicitly agreed to pay rent. Thus, the court did not err in evicting respondents. No challenge is raised on appeal to the amount of respondents’ rent obligation. (Appeal from Order and Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Rosenbloom, J.— Eviction.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Denman, Green and Pine, JJ.

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

Order and judgment unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: In this landlord-tenant proceeding, respondents appeal from an order and judgment which summarily awarded petitioner a warrant of eviction and a money judgment in the principal amount of $3,400, representing unpaid rent of $200 per month. Respondents contend that there are triable questions of fact with respect to the validity of petitioner’s deed to the property and whether respondents are obligated to pay rent.

Summary judgment was properly granted to petitioner because respondents’ conclusory assertions were insufficient to raise triable questions of fact. Despite conveying the property to petitioner under an agreement that expressly provided that respondents were , to retain no interest therein, respondents have remained in possession for over three years and have paid no rent. Objectively viewed, the uncontroverted proof warrants the inference that the parties intended to assume the relation of landlord and tenant (see, 14 Carmody-Wait 2d, NY Prac § 90:137, at 108), that respondents have occupied the premises as tenants, and that they expressly or implicitly agreed to pay rent. Thus, the court did not err in evicting respondents. No challenge is raised on appeal to the amount of respondents’ rent obligation. (Appeal from Order and Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Rosenbloom, J.— Eviction.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Denman, Green and Pine, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

171 A.D.2d 1080, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/polvino-construction-co-v-lawrence-nyappdiv-1991.