We think that the Municipal Court erred in dismissing the complaint for the reason that the evidence was sufficient to show that the defendant held over as a tenant, and was sufficiently strong to require the court to pass upon the question whether the defendant was not liable for the condition of the premises beyond the ordinary wear and tear incident to a proper occupation thereof by the tenant, under the rule recognized in Baker v. Hart, 123 N. Y. at 473, 25 N. E. 948, 12 L. R. A. 60, and Regan v. Luthy, 11 N. Y. Supp. 709. Judgment reversed, and a new trial ordered; costs to- abide the "event. All concur.
119 N.Y.S. 1144
SIEGEL v. GREENBERG.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division. Second Department.
November 24, 1909.)
Appeal from Blunicipal Court, Borough of Brooklyn, Seventh District. Action by Edward S. Siegel against Benjamin B. Greenberg. From a judgment dismissing the complaint, plaintiff appeals.
Reversed, and new trial ordered.
Meyer D. Siegel, for appellant.
Isidore Solomon, -for respondent.
Siegel v. Greenberg
119 N.Y.S. 1144
Case Details
119 N.Y.S. 1144
References
Nothing yet... Still searching!
Nothing yet... Still searching!