From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hankin v. Armstrong

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Dec 29, 1981
113 Misc. 2d 24 (N.Y. App. Term 1981)

Opinion

December 29, 1981

Appeal from the Rockland County Court, HOWARD MILLER, J.

Donald Tirschwell for appellant.

James A. Fitzgerald for respondents.


MEMORANDUM.

Final judgments unanimously modified by granting that part of tenants' motions to consolidate the proceedings, vacating the award of costs and disbursements to the landlord in each of the separate proceedings herein and by substituting one bill of costs and disbursements in favor of the landlord and by remanding the matter to the court below for appropriate entry of said charges, and, as so modified, final judgments affirmed, with $25 costs on appeal to the tenants.

We affirm the findings of the trial court that landlord did not comply with the provisions of section 233 Real Prop. of the Real Property Law when it offered tenants illusory leases to sign. Moreover, we find that the late charges were unreasonable and in the nature of a penalty and, therefore, were not enforceable ( Truck Rent-A-Center v Puritan Farms 2nd, 41 N.Y.2d 420, 423-424; 14 N.Y. Jur, Damages, § 155 et seq.). Finally, the issues herein were identical and the court erred in not consolidating them prior to rendering its determination.

FARLEY, P.J., SLIFKIN and GEILER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Hankin v. Armstrong

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Dec 29, 1981
113 Misc. 2d 24 (N.Y. App. Term 1981)
Case details for

Hankin v. Armstrong

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT HANKIN, Doing Business as BA MAR BASIN MOBILE HOME PARK, Appellant…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department

Date published: Dec 29, 1981

Citations

113 Misc. 2d 24 (N.Y. App. Term 1981)
451 N.Y.S.2d 334

Citing Cases

Highgate Associates, Ltd. v. Merryfield

Finally, plaintiff asserts that the cases from other jurisdictions involving late-payment charges in…

Comorford v. Jones

Appellant advances three interrelated arguments in support of her contention. First, she cites Hankin v…