From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wasserman v. JOHNROY PROPS.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department.
May 22, 1952
202 Misc. 83 (N.Y. App. Term 1952)

Opinion

05-22-1952

Philip Wasserman et al., Landlords, Appellants, v. Johnroy Properties, Inc., Tenant, and Rubymar Corporation, Undertenant, Respondent.


Morton Wasserman for appellants. Max J. Le Boyer and Benjamin Margolis for respondent. FENNELLY, WALSH and BELDOCK, JJ., concur. Per Curiam. The court below had jurisdiction to entertain the counterclaim interposed herein. (Monarch Associates v. Bork Mfg. Co., 195 Misc. 395, and cases there cited.) However, the record here presented does not sustain the trial court's finding in favor of the undertenant Rubymar Corporation upon its counterclaim which is based on the alleged failure of the landlords to retain the security deposit under the lease separate from their own funds as required by section 233 of the Real Property Law. Under all the circumstances disclosed by the record, there should be a new trial. The final order, insofar as appealed from, and judgment should be unanimously reversed upon the law, and new trial granted, with $30 costs to landlords to abide the event. Final order and judgment reversed, etc.


Summaries of

Wasserman v. JOHNROY PROPS.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department.
May 22, 1952
202 Misc. 83 (N.Y. App. Term 1952)
Case details for

Wasserman v. JOHNROY PROPS.

Case Details

Full title:Philip Wasserman et al., Landlords, Appellants,v.Johnroy Properties, Inc.…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department.

Date published: May 22, 1952

Citations

202 Misc. 83 (N.Y. App. Term 1952)