Weinstein v. Weisser

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Weinstein v. Weisser

240 A.D. 724

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

DecidedJune 15, 1933

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 240 A.D. 724 (Weinstein v. Weisser) 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

Weinstein v. Weisser, 240 A.D. 724 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment modified by providing that the defendant be enjoined from the continued maintenance of the said fence to a height in excess of ten feet, measured from the established grade at the curb (122 East 40th Street Corp. v. Dranyam Realty Corp., 226 App. Div. 78), and as so modified, unanimously affirmed, without costs. We are of opinion that the fence was erected in bad faith and, as constructed, constitutes a private nuisance, but we think that under section 3 of the Real Property Law an owner may erect a fence on his land to the height of ten feet, measured in conformity with the holding in the case cited. Findings and conclusions inconsistent herewith are reversed and new findings accordingly will be made, order to be settled on notice. Present — Lazansky, P. J., Kapper, Hagarty, Carswell and Tompkins, JJ.

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

Judgment modified by providing that the defendant be enjoined from the continued maintenance of the said fence to a height in excess of ten feet, measured from the established grade at the curb (122 East 40th Street Corp. v. Dranyam Realty Corp., 226 App. Div. 78), and as so modified, unanimously affirmed, without costs. We are of opinion that the fence was erected in bad faith and, as constructed, constitutes a private nuisance, but we think that under section 3 of the Real Property Law an owner may erect a fence on his land to the height of ten feet, measured in conformity with the holding in the case cited. Findings and conclusions inconsistent herewith are reversed and new findings accordingly will be made, order to be settled on notice. Present — Lazansky, P. J., Kapper, Hagarty, Carswell and Tompkins, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

240 A.D. 724, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weinstein-v-weisser-nyappdiv-1933.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack