From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rocke v. 1041 Bushwick Ave. Assocs., Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 17, 1991
169 A.D.2d 525 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

January 17, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, First Department, Sandifer, J.P., Miller, J.; Parness, J.


Plaintiff, after a fight with her ex-husband, left the apartment to visit her sister. While she was gone, the building's superintendent carried the plaintiff's belongings from the hallway, where her ex-husband had placed them, to the building's basement, and changed the apartment door lock. The record contains evidence sufficient to allow the jury to conclude that the building superintendent did so on the instruction of the building's manager, who was a friend of the plaintiff's ex-husband.

We reject the appellant managing agent's contention, raised for the first time on appeal, that the plaintiff had abandoned her tenancy. The record supports the trial court's award of treble damages pursuant to RPAPL 853 (see, Lyke v Anderson, 147 A.D.2d 18), but not an award of damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress, or of punitive damages, in addition to treble damages.

We have considered the appellant's remaining contentions, and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Ellerin and Ross, JJ.


Summaries of

Rocke v. 1041 Bushwick Ave. Assocs., Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 17, 1991
169 A.D.2d 525 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

Rocke v. 1041 Bushwick Ave. Assocs., Inc.

Case Details

Full title:BETTY ROCKE, Respondent, v. 1041 BUSHWICK AVE. ASSOCS., INC., et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jan 17, 1991

Citations

169 A.D.2d 525 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
564 N.Y.S.2d 379

Citing Cases

Hood v. Koziej

-------- Plaintiff cites to this Court's decision in Rocke v. 1041 Bushwick Ave. Assoc. , 169 A.D.2d 525, 564…

Zaidman v. Babbage

It is clear from the testimony at the hearing that it was never petitioner's intent to assign or relinquish…