From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Goldberg v. Friedman

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Apr 25, 1946
187 Misc. 445 (N.Y. App. Term 1946)

Opinion

April 25, 1946.

Appeal from the Municipal Court of the City of New York, Borough of Queens, PETTE, J.

J. Irwin Shapiro and Abraham Schlissel for appellant.

Lawrence D. Brody for respondent.


MEMORANDUM


The evidence established that the landlord was possessed of more than sufficient equity in the property within the fair contemplation of subdivision (d) of section 8 of chapter 314 of the Laws of 1945. The fact that he momentarily took title thereto in the name of a dummy corporation, of which he was the sole stockholder, may not be invoked for the purpose of defeating his rights herein. The Trial Court's finding of the facts in favor of the landlord necessarily included a holding that he sought in good faith to recover the premises for his immediate personal use.

The final order should be unanimously reversed upon the law, with $30 costs to the landlord, and final order directed for the landlord.

MacCRATE, McCOOEY and STEINBRINK, JJ., concur.

Order reversed, etc.


Summaries of

Goldberg v. Friedman

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Apr 25, 1946
187 Misc. 445 (N.Y. App. Term 1946)
Case details for

Goldberg v. Friedman

Case Details

Full title:MAX GOLDBERG, Landlord, Appellant, v. ADOLPH FRIEDMAN, Tenant, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department

Date published: Apr 25, 1946

Citations

187 Misc. 445 (N.Y. App. Term 1946)
62 N.Y.S.2d 457

Citing Cases

Manufacturers Trust Co. v. Permut

The fact that 29 Broadway, Inc., was used as a vehicle does not affect the situation. ( Goldberg v. Friedman,…