Legal Opinion

Kimmelman v. Tenenbaum

New York Supreme Court

Decided June 20, 1944PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRubenstein, J.

In this action for a declaratory judgment and for incidental relief by way of an injunction, the material facts are not in dispute. On October 1,1942, plaintiff, as tenant, entered into possession of an apartment in defendant’s premises at 4400 Bay 44th Street, this borough, under a written lease which was to expire on September 30, 1943. Prior to its termination, defendant submitted for plaintiff’s approval a renewal lease which did not embody the same favorable terms and conditions contained in the original agreement and the latter refused to accept the same. Upon the expiration of the…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Block v. HirshSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
  2. Chastleton Corp. v. SinclairSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
  3. Marcus Brown Holding Co. v. FeldmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
  4. Edgar A. Levy Leasing Co. v. SiegelSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
  5. Cornwell v. . SanfordNew York Court of Appeals · 1918

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Cintrón v. Corte Municipal de San JuanSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1947
  2. Branizar v. MéndezSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1948
  3. Kuperschmid v. Globe Brief Case Corp.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1945
  4. Roseben Knitting Mills, Inc. v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.New York Supreme Court · 1950
  5. 816 Fifth Avenue, Inc. v. LeonardCity of New York Municipal Court · 1947

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

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

Powered by the Exa API