Lenox Hill Apartments, Inc. v. Goldstein

Summary proceeding for nonpayment of rent. As a counterclaim, the tenant, a lawyer, pleaded that although the landlord, prior to the making of the lease, “ promised and rep*606resented ” there would be doorman service in the building of which the demised premises are a part, no such service was rendered in January, February and March, 1944, to the tenant’s damage in the sum of fifty dollars.

After the proceeding was begun the rent was paid. On the trial, however, the tenant abandoned the theory of promise and representation as pleaded in the counterclaim, and his proof was directed to show that…