Rabkevich v. Gold

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Rabkevich v. Gold

186 Misc. 634, 65 N.Y.S.2d 31, 1946 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2757

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedApril 11, 1946

StatusPublished

This text of 186 Misc. 634 (Rabkevich v. Gold) 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

Rabkevich v. Gold, 186 Misc. 634, 65 N.Y.S.2d 31, 1946 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2757 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1946).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum: Per Curiam.

The landlords failed to establish an “ immediate, compelling necessity ” (Bent Regulation for Housing in New York City Defense-Rental Area, § 6, subd. [a], par. [6]; 10 Federal Register 11667) for the apartment presently occupied by the tenants. Such necessity “ imports more than desire or convenience ” and must be “ real, immediate and urgent.” (Rent Regulation for Housing with Official Interpretations, § 6, subd. [a], par. [6], Interpretation VTII, issued Jan. 10,1946.)

The final order and judgment should be unanimously reversed upon the law and facts, with $30 costs to the tenants, and petition dismissed, with appropriate costs in the court below.

MacCrate, MgCooey and Steinbrink, JJ., concur.

Order and judgment reversed, etc.

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

Memorandum: Per Curiam.

The landlords failed to establish an “ immediate, compelling necessity ” (Bent Regulation for Housing in New York City Defense-Rental Area, § 6, subd. [a], par. [6]; 10 Federal Register 11667) for the apartment presently occupied by the tenants. Such necessity “ imports more than desire or convenience ” and must be “ real, immediate and urgent.” (Rent Regulation for Housing with Official Interpretations, § 6, subd. [a], par. [6], Interpretation VTII, issued Jan. 10,1946.)

The final order and judgment should be unanimously reversed upon the law and facts, with $30 costs to the tenants, and petition dismissed, with appropriate costs in the court below.

MacCrate, MgCooey and Steinbrink, JJ., concur.

Order and judgment reversed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 Misc. 634, 65 N.Y.S.2d 31, 1946 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2757, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rabkevich-v-gold-nyappterm-1946.