From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Southside Development Company v. Mitchell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 19, 1989
156 A.D.2d 268 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Opinion

December 19, 1989

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.).


Defendant has failed to bear his burden of demonstrating a meritorious defense for relief from his default (Guido v New York Tel. Co., 133 A.D.2d 1005). Absent a direct challenge to the latest determination of the Loft Board, this court is precluded from considering on this appeal the issues determined thereat concerning protection to be afforded under the Loft Conversion Law (Multiple Dwelling Law art 7-C; see, Allied Chem. v Niagara Mohawk Power Corp., 72 N.Y.2d 271). The belated challenge to the service of the notice of termination, more than 4 1/2 years after the fact, is both untimely and irrelevant in an ejectment action (Alleyne v Townsley, 110 A.D.2d 674).

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Ross, Carro, Milonas and Ellerin, JJ.


Summaries of

Southside Development Company v. Mitchell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 19, 1989
156 A.D.2d 268 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
Case details for

Southside Development Company v. Mitchell

Case Details

Full title:SOUTHSIDE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, Respondent, v. LEWIS MITCHELL et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Dec 19, 1989

Citations

156 A.D.2d 268 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
548 N.Y.S.2d 656

Citing Cases

Hsiu v. Trujillo

Since RPAPL article 6 did not modify this principle of the common law, service of a notice of termination is…

Hsiu v. Trujillo

Since Article 6 of the RPAPL did not modify this principle of the common law, service of a notice of…