Shelton Building Corp. v. Baggett

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Shelton Building Corp. v. Baggett

188 Misc. 709, 71 N.Y.S.2d 434, 1947 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2570

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMarch 10, 1947

StatusPublished

Cited by12 cases

This text of 188 Misc. 709 (Shelton Building Corp. v. Baggett) 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

Shelton Building Corp. v. Baggett, 188 Misc. 709, 71 N.Y.S.2d 434, 1947 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2570 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1947).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Memorandum

It was error to dismiss the landlord’s petition for failure to serve a thirty days’ notice to terminate the tenancy. Such notice was not required under the terms of the lease which expired on May 31, 1945, or under the Bent Regulation for Housing. The tenant, by continuing in possession after that date, became a statutory tenant (Stern v. Equitable Trust Co., 238 N. Y. 267; Tomphins v. Kornfeld, 186 Misc. 464; Boyce Haulage Corp v. Bronx Terminal Garage, 185 Misc. 892). Under such a tenancy the terms and conditions of the lease are deemed to continue in effect except where they are plainly inconsistent with the emergency rent regulations (Stern v. Equitable Trust Co., supra; 130 West 57 Corp. v. Hyman, 188 Misc. 92; Gilpin v. Mutual Life Ins. Co. of N. Y., 64 N. Y. S. 2d 436). The provision against the subletting of the apartment without the written consent of the. landlord remained binding upon the tenant. Its breach constituted a violation of a substantial obligation of the tenancy so as to authorize removal proceedings against her under paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) of section 6 of the Rent Regulation for'Housing in the Hew York City Defense-Rental Area (8 Federal Register 13918).

The final order should be reversed on the law,.with $30 costs to the landlord, and final order directed for the landlord.

MacCrate Steinbrink and Fennelly, JJ., concur.

Order reversed, etc.

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

Per Curiam.

Memorandum

It was error to dismiss the landlord’s petition for failure to serve a thirty days’ notice to terminate the tenancy. Such notice was not required under the terms of the lease which expired on May 31, 1945, or under the Bent Regulation for Housing. The tenant, by continuing in possession after that date, became a statutory tenant (Stern v. Equitable Trust Co., 238 N. Y. 267; Tomphins v. Kornfeld, 186 Misc. 464; Boyce Haulage Corp v. Bronx Terminal Garage, 185 Misc. 892). Under such a tenancy the terms and conditions of the lease are deemed to continue in effect except where they are plainly inconsistent with the emergency rent regulations (Stern v. Equitable Trust Co., supra; 130 West 57 Corp. v. Hyman, 188 Misc. 92; Gilpin v. Mutual Life Ins. Co. of N. Y., 64 N. Y. S. 2d 436). The provision against the subletting of the apartment without the written consent of the. landlord remained binding upon the tenant. Its breach constituted a violation of a substantial obligation of the tenancy so as to authorize removal proceedings against her under paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) of section 6 of the Rent Regulation for'Housing in the Hew York City Defense-Rental Area (8 Federal Register 13918).

The final order should be reversed on the law,.with $30 costs to the landlord, and final order directed for the landlord.

MacCrate Steinbrink and Fennelly, JJ., concur.

Order reversed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

188 Misc. 709, 71 N.Y.S.2d 434, 1947 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2570, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shelton-building-corp-v-baggett-nyappterm-1947.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack