Abeel & Abeel v. Radcliff
New York Supreme Court
This was an action for the use and occupation of a lot of i ground, dwelling house, and premises, situate in the town of ® ° „ * Catskill, in the county of Greene.
Read the full summary
This was an action for the use and occupation of a lot of i ground, dwelling house, and premises, situate in the town of ® ° „ * Catskill, in the county of Greene. At the trial, it was proved by a witness on the part of the plaintiffs, that there was a dwelling house and barn on the premises in question, which he hired of the defendant, and had occupied them for two years and upwards, and paid the rent of Í 80 dollars, exclusive of taxes, of which 150 dollars were paid in cash, and the residue in improvements to the buildings. He testified that this was a high rent, though the . i i ,…
1Opinion of the CourtSrencer, J.
The right of the plaintiffs to recover, as for the use and occupation of the premises, was settled by the decision of this court between the same parties, (13 Johns. Rep. 297.) under the same state of facts. The plaintiffs claim the real annual value of the premises; the defendant insists that they are entitled to recover only the rent stipulated in the original lease for ten years, which is 11 dollars and 25 cents, or, at most, the annual value of the lot, without the-buildings.
The principle is, undoubtedly, a sound one, that where a tenant holds over, without any new stipulation between the…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Conway v. StarkweatherCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1845
- Harkins v. PopeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1846
- Bradley v. CovelNew York Supreme Court · 1825
- Holsman v. AbramsThe Superior Court of New York City · 1853
- Witt v. Mayor of New YorkThe Superior Court of New York City · 1867
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.