Legal Opinion
In re O'Donnell
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided March 7, 1924PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Kelly, P. J.:
The appellants, citing Mason v. Lenderoth in this department (88 App. Div. 38, 40), argue that the grain company was bound to *381show an eviction or an actual ouster by a paramount lawful title (Parkinson v. Sherman, 74 N. Y. 88, 93), and that while eviction may be worked without resort to physical force or legal process (Home Life Ins. Co. v. Sherman, 46 id. 370), they contend that the record fails to show that the tenant in the case at bar. yielded possession of the premises under any of the circumstances which the courts have held sufficient disturbance of quiet enjoyment to…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. . Childs Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1921
- Schuyler v. . SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Williams v. . AltNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
- Parkinson v. . ShermanNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- Fowler v. PolingNew York Supreme Court · 1849
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- In re the Estate of McKennaNew York Surrogate's Court · 1939
- In re the Estate of LangeNew York Surrogate's Court · 1939
- In re the Estate of SpringerNew York Surrogate's Court · 1930