From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dolan v. Dolan

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Jan 22, 1925
125 Misc. 849 (N.Y. App. Term 1925)

Opinion

January 22, 1925.

William J. McDermott, for the appellant.

Joseph Katz, for the respondent.


Judgment unanimously reversed upon the law and new trial granted, with fifteen dollars costs to appellant to abide the event.

Under section 532 of the Real Property Law (as added by Laws of 1920, chap. 930), an action at law may be maintained by one joint tenant or one tenant in common against another to recover his just proportion of the rent where the tenant sued has received more than his just proportion. While a court of equity also has jurisdiction in such a case, its jurisdiction is concurrent and not exclusive. ( Joslyn v. Joslyn, 9 Hun, 388-390; Wright v. Wright, 59 How. Pr. 176, 184; Coakley v. Mahar, 36 Hun, 157; Maekotter v. Maekotter, 74 Misc. 214, 216; Minion v. Warner, 185 A.D. 246, 247; 238 N.Y. 413, 417, 418.)

Tenants by the entirety come within the foregoing rule. ( Matter of Goodrich v. Village of Otego, 216 N.Y. 112, 117.)

Present: CROPSEY, LAZANSKY and MacCRATE, JJ.


Summaries of

Dolan v. Dolan

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Jan 22, 1925
125 Misc. 849 (N.Y. App. Term 1925)
Case details for

Dolan v. Dolan

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM E. DOLAN, Appellant, v . MARGARET A. DOLAN, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department

Date published: Jan 22, 1925

Citations

125 Misc. 849 (N.Y. App. Term 1925)
211 N.Y.S. 507

Citing Cases

Villone v. Villone

This has been affirmed by the courts in many cases. (See Messing v. Messing, 64 A.D. 125; Dolan v. Dolan, 125…

O'Connell v. Kelly

Such tenants are not partners, and the Municipal Court has jurisdiction of such an action. This court decided…