114 East 40th Corp. v. Armstrong
New York Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtThomas A. Aurelio, J.
This is a proceeding brought pursuant to subdivision (c) of section 2 of the Business Rent Law (L. 1945, oh. 314, as amd.). Subdivision (a) of section 2 (as amd. by L. 1952, ch. 417) defines “ Business space ” to include ‘ ‘ on and after March first, nineteen hundred fifty-two, a building in which at least sixty per centum of the total rentable area and sixty per centum of the total number of units formerly used ais dwelling space, is lawfully occupied as business space on such date ”.
Subdivision (c) of this section (as last amd. by L. 1957, ch. 452) provides: “(c) ‘ Emergency rent.’ * * *…
2Cited by4 opinions
- In re Sipal Realty Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1958
- Bishop v. 339 Lexington Avenue Corp.Civil Court of the City of New York · 1963
- In re Sipal Realty Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1960
- In re Sipal Realty Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1959