Legal Opinion

Matter of Edwards v. Murdock

New York Court of Appeals

Decided July 24, 1940PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Per curiam

Before the petitioner acquired Ms leasehold of the lodging house in question, the erection therein of the so-called cuMcles had been completed pursuant to plans that had been approved by the Department of Buildings and a certificate of occupancy had been issued by the Commissioner of Buildings. No claim is made that tMs certificate of occupancy was not a “ certificate ” in the sense of section 301 of the Multiple Dwelling Law (Cons. Laws, ch. 61-a). Section 301 provides: “No tenement house shall hereafter be occupied in whole or in part for human habitation until the issuance of a certificate…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Robitzek Investing Co. v. Colonial Beacon Oil Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1943
  2. S. B. Garage Corp. v. MurdockNew York Supreme Court · 1945
  3. Rathkopf v. Remsen Street Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1963
  4. Bekermus v. NardyNew York Supreme Court · 1984
  5. Malnuet Realty Corp. v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989

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