From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pitman v. White

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Dec 16, 1930
138 Misc. 556 (N.Y. App. Term 1930)

Opinion

December 16, 1930.

Appeal from the Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, First District.

Emanuel M. Ostrow, for tenant John White and undertenants Stoetzer.

William I. Siegel, for the undertenant August Andre.

Francis Martocci, for the respondent.


The provisions of the lease with regard to the effect of non-payment of rent created a condition and not a conditional limitation. ( Burnee Corp. v. Uneeda Pure Orange Drink Co., 132 Misc. 435.) While a summary proceeding might have been brought under subdivision 2 of section 1410 of the Civil Practice Act, for failure to pay the rent, the present proceeding, brought under subdivision 1 on the theory that the term had expired, will not lie.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs, and petition dismissed, with costs.

All concur; present, LYDON, LEVY and FRANKENTHALER, JJ.


Summaries of

Pitman v. White

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Dec 16, 1930
138 Misc. 556 (N.Y. App. Term 1930)
Case details for

Pitman v. White

Case Details

Full title:KATHERINE PITMAN, Landlord, Respondent, v. JOHN WHITE, Tenant, and JOHN G…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department

Date published: Dec 16, 1930

Citations

138 Misc. 556 (N.Y. App. Term 1930)
246 N.Y.S. 619

Citing Cases

Matter of Farone v. Burns

A landlord must allege, under these circumstances that the tenancy expired by lapse of time and not by breach…