Swift v. 130 West 57th Corp.

New York Court of Appeals

Swift v. 130 West 57th Corp.

257 N.E.2d 53, 26 N.Y.2d 714, 308 N.Y.S.2d 875, 1970 N.Y. LEXIS 1579

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedJanuary 22, 1970

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 257 N.E.2d 53 (Swift v. 130 West 57th Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Swift v. 130 West 57th Corp., 257 N.E.2d 53, 26 N.Y.2d 714, 308 N.Y.S.2d 875, 1970 N.Y. LEXIS 1579 (N.Y. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and the case remitted to Supreme Court, New York County, for a new trial on the first cause of action, with costs, to abide the .event. Although it is always salutary to have the prior benefit of the regulatory determination of the City Rent Agency, the trial court was empowered and, therefore, was required to determine whether the entire apartment was subject to rent control. If, in fact, the subject premises (13B-14D) had been theretofore divided so that on February 1, 1947 apartment 14D was independently devoted to a nonhousing use by a separate tenant, there need be no additional showing of substantial structural changes in the premises (Administrative Code of City of New York, § Y51-3.0, subd. e, par. 2, cl. [i], subcl. [1]). The record is confused and inadequate on the issue of use on February 1, 1947, a critical date. It is evident that competent and probative evidence to establish the use was not presented, but instead there was reliance on various papers for which incomplete foundations were laid and on the less than precise testimony of the corporate officer.

*717 Chief Judge. Fuld and Judges Burke, Scileppi, Bergan, Breitel, Jasen and Gibson concur.

Order reversed and the case remitted to Supreme Court, New York County, for further proceedings in accordance -with the memorandum herein, with costs to abide the event.

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

Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and the case remitted to Supreme Court, New York County, for a new trial on the first cause of action, with costs, to abide the .event. Although it is always salutary to have the prior benefit of the regulatory determination of the City Rent Agency, the trial court was empowered and, therefore, was required to determine whether the entire apartment was subject to rent control. If, in fact, the subject premises (13B-14D) had been theretofore divided so that on February 1, 1947 apartment 14D was independently devoted to a nonhousing use by a separate tenant, there need be no additional showing of substantial structural changes in the premises (Administrative Code of City of New York, § Y51-3.0, subd. e, par. 2, cl. [i], subcl. [1]). The record is confused and inadequate on the issue of use on February 1, 1947, a critical date. It is evident that competent and probative evidence to establish the use was not presented, but instead there was reliance on various papers for which incomplete foundations were laid and on the less than precise testimony of the corporate officer.

*717 Chief Judge. Fuld and Judges Burke, Scileppi, Bergan, Breitel, Jasen and Gibson concur.

Order reversed and the case remitted to Supreme Court, New York County, for further proceedings in accordance -with the memorandum herein, with costs to abide the event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

257 N.E.2d 53, 26 N.Y.2d 714, 308 N.Y.S.2d 875, 1970 N.Y. LEXIS 1579, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/swift-v-130-west-57th-corp-ny-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack