Rossin v. Pisapio

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Rossin v. Pisapio

140 Misc. 294, 250 N.Y.S. 441, 1931 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1341

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMay 28, 1931

StatusPublished

This text of 140 Misc. 294 (Rossin v. Pisapio) 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

Rossin v. Pisapio, 140 Misc. 294, 250 N.Y.S. 441, 1931 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1341 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The fine was improperly imposed herein to the extent that it was based on the disposal of income received after the service of the supplementary order. Income from furnished rooms is not in the category of rent reserved to the debtor as landlord under an existing lease as in the case of Stevens v. Dewey (13 App. Div. 312). There was no proof herein that at the time of the service of the supplementary order the debtor had any enforeible agreement with any subtenant or lodger to receive future rents or income from the property.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs to be applied upon the judgment, without prejudice to a further motion to punish for contempt with relation to any preacquired property.

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

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

Per Curiam.

The fine was improperly imposed herein to the extent that it was based on the disposal of income received after the service of the supplementary order. Income from furnished rooms is not in the category of rent reserved to the debtor as landlord under an existing lease as in the case of Stevens v. Dewey (13 App. Div. 312). There was no proof herein that at the time of the service of the supplementary order the debtor had any enforeible agreement with any subtenant or lodger to receive future rents or income from the property.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs to be applied upon the judgment, without prejudice to a further motion to punish for contempt with relation to any preacquired property.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

140 Misc. 294, 250 N.Y.S. 441, 1931 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1341, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rossin-v-pisapio-nyappterm-1931.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack