From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ostend Realty Corp. v. Lehman

Municipal Court of the City of New York, Borough of Queens.
Jul 22, 1953
204 Misc. 234 (N.Y. Dist. Ct. 1953)

Opinion

07-22-1953

Ostend Realty Corp., Landlord, v. Maurice J. Lehman, Tenant.


Moses Z. Yam for tenant appearing specially. Abraham R. Margulies for landlord. HOCKERT, J. Petition is dismissed as the landlord, a corporation, does not appear by an attorney as required by section 236 of the Civil Practice Act (Hillside Housing Corp. v. Eisenberger, 173 Misc. 75). The petition has no mention of an attorney. An attorney whose name appears on the precept without designating him as an attorney is insufficient to comply with the statute. There is no proof submitted by the landlord corporation that it has an attorney and/or commenced this proceeding by an attorney. (Gaston & Co. v. All Russian Zemsky Union, 221 App. Div. 732.) The question is properly raised by a special appearance of the tenant and the petition is hereby dismissed.


Summaries of

Ostend Realty Corp. v. Lehman

Municipal Court of the City of New York, Borough of Queens.
Jul 22, 1953
204 Misc. 234 (N.Y. Dist. Ct. 1953)
Case details for

Ostend Realty Corp. v. Lehman

Case Details

Full title:Ostend Realty Corp., Landlord,v.Maurice J. Lehman, Tenant.

Court:Municipal Court of the City of New York, Borough of Queens.

Date published: Jul 22, 1953

Citations

204 Misc. 234 (N.Y. Dist. Ct. 1953)