From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Flo-Ru-Na Inc., v. Zimmerman

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Oct 18, 1945
185 Misc. 759 (N.Y. App. Term 1945)

Opinion

October 18, 1945.

Appeal from the Municipal Court of the City of New York, Borough of Brooklyn, MORRISSEY, J.

Michael Schneiderman for appellant.

Samuel Wagner for respondent.



MEMORANDUM


The landlord presented no evidence to sustain its burden of proof under the Commercial Rent Law (L. 1945, ch. 3, as amd. by L. 1945, ch. 315) that "the rent charged is not greater than the emergency rent for such commercial space." (L. 1945, ch. 3, § 6, clause [a].)

The lease between the parties, with its stipulated rental, is not an agreement fixing an emergency rent within the meaning of the statute. Nor may it be taken as a waiver on the tenant's part of any of the benefits conferred upon him by the statute (L. 1945, ch. 315, § 12).

The final order should be unanimously reversed upon the law, with $10 costs, and a new trial granted, with $10 costs to the tenant to abide the event.

MacCRATE, McCOOEY and STEINBRINK, JJ., concur.

Order reversed, etc.


Summaries of

Flo-Ru-Na Inc., v. Zimmerman

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Oct 18, 1945
185 Misc. 759 (N.Y. App. Term 1945)
Case details for

Flo-Ru-Na Inc., v. Zimmerman

Case Details

Full title:FLO-RU-NA INC., Landlord, Respondent, v. SELMA ZIMMERMAN, Individually and…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department

Date published: Oct 18, 1945

Citations

185 Misc. 759 (N.Y. App. Term 1945)
58 N.Y.S.2d 483

Citing Cases

91 E. B'Way Corp. v. Pippo Toy Co.

The landlord insists that the rental reserved in the lease agreement is, ipso facto, sufficient to justify…

Wesley v. Brinkly

No agreement was entered into fixing the reasonable rent and no option to cancel within sixty days was given…