From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cammann v. Krane

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Nov 18, 1931
142 Misc. 10 (N.Y. App. Term 1931)

Opinion

November 18, 1931.

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

Alex. B. Greenberg, for the appellant.

Delafield, Thorne, Burleigh Marsh [ W. Howard Fisher of counsel], for the respondents.


The manifest inconsistency between the 6th printed clause and the 16th typewritten clause of the lease drawn by the landlords makes the printed clause inoperative ( Cohen v. Peterson, 125 Misc. 846); and as under the typewritten part of the agreement the sum of $875, security deposited by the tenant, belonged to the landlords as liquidated and stipulated damages in the event of dispossession, and there appears no claim of damage other than loss of rent, the landlords were not entitled, in addition to the final order, to recover judgment in the proceeding for the $825, rent due.

Final order so far as appealed from reversed, with thirty dollars costs, and petition in so far as it demands judgment for rent dismissed, with costs.

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


Summaries of

Cammann v. Krane

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Nov 18, 1931
142 Misc. 10 (N.Y. App. Term 1931)
Case details for

Cammann v. Krane

Case Details

Full title:EDWARD C. CAMMANN, Survivor of HENRY L. CAMMANN, and Another, as Joint…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department

Date published: Nov 18, 1931

Citations

142 Misc. 10 (N.Y. App. Term 1931)
253 N.Y.S. 761