Rosenthal v. Gingold Realty Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rosenthal v. Gingold Realty Co.

175 A.D. 970, 162 N.Y.S. 143, 1916 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8956

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

DecidedDecember 15, 1916

StatusPublished

This text of 175 A.D. 970 (Rosenthal v. Gingold Realty Co.) 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

Rosenthal v. Gingold Realty Co., 175 A.D. 970, 162 N.Y.S. 143, 1916 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8956 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The court at Special Term made an order on November 8, 1916, directing the appellant to pay §8,095.01 to the receiver in foreclosure of the rents of certain premises, this amount being rent due in September and on October 10, 1916. The plaintiff is the mortgagee, and the order was made in his action to foreclose his mortgage. The action was begun October 3, 1916, and the order appointing the receiver was made October 4, 1916. The defendant tenant had a lease of the whole building at an annual rental of §24,760, payable in equal semi-monthly, payments in advance on the tenth and twentieth of each month, and he sublet the premises to various sub-tenants. It appears from the moving papers that the defendant Slutnik collected from his sub-tenants the rent they were obligated to pay for September, and that he has paid no part of his September rent amounting to §2,063.34. Under the authority of American Mortgage Co. v. Sire (103 App. Div. 396-399) and Greenwich Savings Bank v. Silverman (153 id. 883) the order appealed from is reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with ten dollars costs. Present—Clarke, P. J., Laughlin, Dowling, Page and Davis, JJ. Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

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

Per Curiam:

The court at Special Term made an order on November 8, 1916, directing the appellant to pay §8,095.01 to the receiver in foreclosure of the rents of certain premises, this amount being rent due in September and on October 10, 1916. The plaintiff is the mortgagee, and the order was made in his action to foreclose his mortgage. The action was begun October 3, 1916, and the order appointing the receiver was made October 4, 1916. The defendant tenant had a lease of the whole building at an annual rental of §24,760, payable in equal semi-monthly, payments in advance on the tenth and twentieth of each month, and he sublet the premises to various sub-tenants. It appears from the moving papers that the defendant Slutnik collected from his sub-tenants the rent they were obligated to pay for September, and that he has paid no part of his September rent amounting to §2,063.34. Under the authority of American Mortgage Co. v. Sire (103 App. Div. 396-399) and Greenwich Savings Bank v. Silverman (153 id. 883) the order appealed from is reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with ten dollars costs. Present—Clarke, P. J., Laughlin, Dowling, Page and Davis, JJ. Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

175 A.D. 970, 162 N.Y.S. 143, 1916 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8956, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rosenthal-v-gingold-realty-co-nyappdiv-1916.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack