Six-Ten Corp. v. Oppell

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Six-Ten Corp. v. Oppell

186 Misc. 628, 56 N.Y.S.2d 573, 1945 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2065

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJune 25, 1945

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 186 Misc. 628 (Six-Ten Corp. v. Oppell) 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

Six-Ten Corp. v. Oppell, 186 Misc. 628, 56 N.Y.S.2d 573, 1945 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2065 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1945).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum Per Curiam.

The tenant’s occupancy of the basement apartment is in violation of láw. It thus became the duty of the landlord, after due notice from the Department of Housing and Buildings of the City of New York, to remove the tenant (Multiple Dwelling Law, § 216; Nordred Realties, Inc., v. Langley, 279 N. Y. 636). The fact that the landlord’s predecessor in title permitted the occupancy under a lease is not binding on the present landlord, nor may it override the provisions of law.

The final order should be reversed, and final order awarded to petitioner for possession of the premises described in the peti[629]*629tion, with costs, without prejudice to application for stay under section 1436-a of the Civil Practice Act.

Hammeb, Shientag and Edeb, JJ., concur.

Order reversed, etc.

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