Legal Opinion
Harfried Realty Co. v. Spuyten Amusement Corp.
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
Decided March 15, 1934PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCallahan, J.
In this summary proceeding for non-payment of rent of a theatre building the tenant pleaded as a counter claim that the landlord carelessly and negligently allowed and permitted water draining from the roof of a building adjoining the demised premises, such adjoining building being owned or controlled by the landlord, to enter upon and into the demised premises so as to cause water to be collected in the basement, toilets and other parts of the demised premises, resulting in great damage to the tenant and to the demised theatre, of all of which due notice was given the landlord, the landlord…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Four Forty-One Holding Corp. v. BloomAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1933
- Goelet v. GoldsteinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1930
- Franklin Building Co. v. FinnAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1914
- Harfried Realty Co. v. Spuyten Amusement Corp.City of New York Municipal Court · 1933
- Ginsburg v. F. W. Woolworth & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1917
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Haskell v. SuritaCivil Court of the City of New York · 1981
- Fry v. WeyenIdaho Supreme Court · 1937
- Klein v. FederbushCity of New York Municipal Court · 1956
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. ShapiroAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1937
- 610 W. 142nd St. Owners Corp. v. BraxtonCivil Court of the City of New York · 1987
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.