Schwartz v. Schultz

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Schwartz v. Schultz

128 Misc. 468, 219 N.Y.S. 13, 1926 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 800

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided December 16, 1926·Published

Opinions

Per Curiam.

That the tenants undertook to procure the necessary permit from the fire department does not bar a recovery. It is undisputed that such permit could not be obtained, and the plaintiffs having abandoned possession and terminated the lease have a right, there being no counterclaim presented, to recover the moneys deposited with the landlord to secure performance of their covenants. (Raner v. Goldberg, 215 App. Div. 355.)

Judgment reversed, with thirty dollars costs, and judgment directed for plaintiffs for the relief demanded in the summons, with interest and costs.

Present — Bijur, O’Malley and Levy, JJ.

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

Per Curiam.

That the tenants undertook to procure the necessary permit from the fire department does not bar a recovery. It is undisputed that such permit could not be obtained, and the plaintiffs having abandoned possession and terminated the lease have a right, there being no counterclaim presented, to recover the moneys deposited with the landlord to secure performance of their covenants. (Raner v. Goldberg, 215 App. Div. 355.)

Judgment reversed, with thirty dollars costs, and judgment directed for plaintiffs for the relief demanded in the summons, with interest and costs.

Present — Bijur, O’Malley and Levy, JJ.

Schwartz v. Schultz, 128 Misc. 468, 219 N.Y.S. 13, 1926 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 800 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1926).

Pincite

128 Misc. 468 (Schwartz v. Schultz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinions

Related