Legal Opinion

Yorkshire House Associates v. Lulkin

Civil Court of the City of New York

Decided May 5, 1982PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Richard Lee Price, J.

Respondents’ motion to reargue is granted and, upon reconsideration, respondents’ motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211 (subd [a]) is hereby granted. Petitioner’s cross motion for summary judgment is denied.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The petitioner landlord in this case, Yorkshire House Associates (hereinafter referred to as Yorkshire) instituted a holdover proceeding against the respondents on September 11,1981. On November 9,1981, the respondent tenants made a motion to dismiss the holdover petition pursuant to CPLR 3211 (subd [a], par 1). That motion…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Derby v. PrewittNew York Court of Appeals · 1962
  2. MTR OF HERZOG v. JoyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
  3. Lederer v. Wise Shoe Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1938
  4. Tefft v. Apex Pawnbroking & Jewelry Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
  5. Hudson View Properties v. WeissAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1981

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Cooper v. FrenchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
  2. State Ex Rel. Cooper v. FrenchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API