Legal Opinion
Goldman Bros. v. Forester
Civil Court of the City of New York
Decided March 18, 1970PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtAllen Murray Myers, J.
The petition and notice of petition, upon which this nonpayment summary proceeding for the possession of residential premises is based, are jurisdictionally defective and cannot be cured by amendment.
Although the title of the proceeding states that Goldman Bros, is the petitioner and the petition states that it is the petition of Goldman Bros., the petition is not subscribed or verified by Goldman Bros. While it is true that a summary proceeding may be brought by an agent of the landlord, if it is, the petition must then be that of the agent, subscribed and verified by him. In the case at bar…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Handshke v. LoysenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922
- Hanover Estates, lnc. v. FinkelsteinCity of New York Municipal Court · 1949
- Stephen Estates, Inc. v. KaplanCity of New York Municipal Court · 1950
- In re SmithAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922
- Liberty Place Holding Corp. v. Adolph Schwob, Inc.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1930
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- MSG Pomp Corp. v. DoeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- 300 West Realty Co. v. WoodCivil Court of the City of New York · 1971
- Zenila Realty Corp. v. MasterandreaCivil Court of the City of New York · 1984
- Fitzgerald v. WashingtonCivil Court of the City of New York · 1975
- Berkeley Associates Co. v. Di NolfiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.