Legal Opinion
Brussel v. Ruxton Associates
New York Supreme Court
Decided June 7, 1982PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Ira Gammerman, J.
In this motion plaintiffs seek a judgment declaring that they are entitled to maintain private telephones in their apartments. Plaintiffs also seek summary judgment on the issue of liability on their causes of action based on a breach of the warranty of habitability, overcharge and violation of their right to privacy. The numerous named plaintiffs are tenants in a class A residential hotel located at 50 West 72nd Street, New York City. By the terms of the leases plaintiffs entered into with defendant, Ruxton Associates, they agreed that they would not…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Park West Management Corp. v. MitchellNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
- Curry v. New York City Housing AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
- Kaplan v. CoulstonCivil Court of the City of New York · 1976
- McBride v. 218 E. 70th Street AssociatesAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1979
3Cited by3 opinions
- Alharb v. SayeghAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- Pezzolanella v. GallowayUtica City Court · 1986
- Brussel v. Ruxton Hotel AssociatesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983