Townhouse Co. v. Plotkin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Townhouse Co. v. Plotkin

12 A.D.3d 269, 784 N.Y.S.2d 365, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13748

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 18, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 12 A.D.3d 269 (Townhouse Co. v. Plotkin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Townhouse Co. v. Plotkin, 12 A.D.3d 269, 784 N.Y.S.2d 365, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13748 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Beeler, J.), entered February 23, 2004, which, inter alia, denied plaintiffs motion insofar as it sought partial summary judgment on its first three causes of action and denied defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Under the facts of this case, reasonable minds might differ as to whether the changes in elevator service rose to the level of constructive eviction. Whether the landlord’s conduct was of such character as to justify the tenants’ abandonment of the premises is a question for the trier of facts (see Hayden Co. v Kehoe, 177 App Div 734 [1917]). We have considered the parties’ remaining contentions for affirmative relief and find them without merit. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Friedman, Marlow and Sweeny, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Beeler, J.), entered February 23, 2004, which, inter alia, denied plaintiffs motion insofar as it sought partial summary judgment on its first three causes of action and denied defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Under the facts of this case, reasonable minds might differ as to whether the changes in elevator service rose to the level of constructive eviction. Whether the landlord’s conduct was of such character as to justify the tenants’ abandonment of the premises is a question for the trier of facts (see Hayden Co. v Kehoe, 177 App Div 734 [1917]). We have considered the parties’ remaining contentions for affirmative relief and find them without merit. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Friedman, Marlow and Sweeny, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 A.D.3d 269, 784 N.Y.S.2d 365, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13748, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/townhouse-co-v-plotkin-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack