Legal Opinion

Schwartz v. Schultz

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided December 16, 1926Published

1Per curiam

That the tenants undertook to procure the necessary permit from the fire department does not bar a recovery. It is undisputed that such permit could not be obtained, and the plaintiffs having abandoned possession and terminated the lease have a right, there being no counterclaim presented, to recover the moneys deposited with the landlord to secure performance of their covenants. (Raner v. Goldberg, 215 App. Div. 355.)

Judgment reversed, with thirty dollars costs, and judgment directed for plaintiffs for the relief demanded in the summons, with interest and costs.

Present — Bijur, O’Malley and…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Raner v. GoldbergAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1926

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

Powered by the Exa API