Legal Opinion
Eight Associates v. Hynes
New York Court of Appeals
Decided June 6, 1985PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, and the certified question not answered as unnecessary.
The question before the court is whether the Appellate Division erred as a matter of law in finding that the “reasonable application” requirement of RPAPL 735 (1) had not been met by appellant landlord by a single attempt to make service on respondent tenant at noon on a weekday before affixing the notice of petition and petition to the apartment door and mailing a second copy by certified mail. Put another way, the question before us is…
2Cited by29 opinions
- Dolan v. LinnenCivil Court of the City of New York · 2003
- Matter of 322 W. 47th St. HDFC v. LooAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- Avgush v. BerrahuAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 2007
- Martine Associates LLC v. MinckAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 2004
- Chester Mamaroneck Gardens, L. L. C. v. RiggsbeeAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 2001
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.