Power Test Petroleum Distributors, Inc. v. Marche

110 A.D.2d 893
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 29, 1985
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 110 A.D.2d 893 (Power Test Petroleum Distributors, Inc. v. Marche) 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
Power Test Petroleum Distributors, Inc. v. Marche, 110 A.D.2d 893 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Opinion

[894]*894In this action to recover damages in connection inter alia, with defendant Louis La Marche’s alleged renting or leasing of eight gasoline stations from plaintiffs, plaintiffs failed to prove the amount of rent owed on the Francis Lewis Boulevard station (cf. Martin Delicatessen v Schumacher, 52 NY2d 105; Reisler v 60 Gramercy Park N. Corp., 88 AD2d 312, 317). Nor did plaintiffs adequately prove an amount to which they might be entitled for reasonable use and occupancy of the premises. Hence, the amount awarded as rent for the Francis Lewis Boulevard station, i.e., $5,162.93, must be stricken. Similarly, plaintiffs failed to establish defendant Louis La Marche’s liability for maintenance charges sought in connection with the Francis Lewis Boulevard station ($976.31), and the Long Island City station ($57.83). Consequently, the judgment should also be reduced by the amounts recovered for maintenance at these two stations. Defendant Louis La Marche’s remaining arguments have been reviewed and have been found to lack merit.

With respect to defendant Celeste La Marche’s appeal, the trial court correctly noted that it was unnecessary to resettle the judgment to provide that an order of attachment against her property be annulled. Pursuant to CPLR 6224, the order of attachment against defendant Celeste La Marche’s property was annulled upon the entry of judgment in her favor. Finally, under the circumstances, the determination that costs or disbursements should not be awarded to defendant Celeste La Marche [895]*895(CPLR 8101) was appropriate. Lazer, J. P., Mangano, Bracken and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

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

Related

255 Butler Assoc., LLC v. 255 Butler, LLC
2019 NY Slip Op 4344 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Marini v. Lombardo
79 A.D.3d 932 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
110 A.D.2d 893, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/power-test-petroleum-distributors-inc-v-marche-nyappdiv-1985.