Legal Opinion

Freehold Investments v. Richstone

New York Court of Appeals

Decided March 21, 1974PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Order reversed, without costs, and the order of the Appellate Term reinstated in the following memorandum: The evidence persuasively demonstrates, as a matter of law, that the alterations were sufficiently substantial to constitute a significant injury to the reversion, entitling appellant landlord to possession of the premises.

Concur: Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler and Rabin. Taking no part: Judge Stevens.

2Cited by11 opinions

  1. Rumiche Corp. v. EisenreichNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
  2. Harar Realty Corp. v. Michlin & Hill, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
  3. Haberman v. HawkinsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
  4. Britton v. YaziciogluAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
  5. In Re Allen Carpet Shops, Inc.United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. New York · 1982

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API