Pool v. Higginson
New York Court of Common Pleas
Motion to continue during the pendency of the action a temporary injunction which had been granted ex parte. This action was brought by Pool, a. tenant of apartments, against Coleman, his landlord, and Higginson, another tenant, having apartments over the plaintiff, to obtain damages for injuries alleged to have been occasioned .plaintiff and his family by the noise of the rolling of “ a cart or wagon ” containing Higginson’s baby, and to obtain a perpetual injunction…
Read the full summary
Motion to continue during the pendency of the action a temporary injunction which had been granted ex parte. This action was brought by Pool, a. tenant of apartments, against Coleman, his landlord, and Higginson, another tenant, having apartments over the plaintiff, to obtain damages for injuries alleged to have been occasioned .plaintiff and his family by the noise of the rolling of “ a cart or wagon ” containing Higginson’s baby, and to obtain a perpetual injunction against such roiling. The motion was heard upon the complaint and affidavits. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtVan Hoesen, J.
The plaintiff occupies apartments on the fourth floor of No. 68 Madison Avenue, and the defendant occupies apartments on the fifth floor, directly above those of the plaintiff. The house belongs to the class of tenements called French flats. The affidavits describe the rooms of both parties as fitted up with furniture designed especially for those very rooms. Neither party could move without running the risk of getting other apartments to which the furniture might not he.suited. They both have strong reasons, therefore, for wishing to stay where they are. The defendant’s family consists of…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Douglas L. Elliman & Co. v. KarlsenCivil Court of the City of New York · 1969
- Hixson v. LeonardCity of New York Municipal Court · 1945