Legal Opinion
Kohl v. Fusco
Civil Court of the City of New York
Decided November 22, 1994PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
George M. Heymann, J.
The respondent in this nonpayment proceeding is seeking to be restored to the subject premises which subsequent to her eviction was relet to a new tenant.
Respondent’s pro se order to show cause alleges, inter alia, that the subject building was sold to a new owner at auction prior to her eviction; that the new owner could not maintain this action because he was never substituted as a party; and that this proceeding was consolidated with a prior proceeding.
*433Respondent’s counsel obtained an order to show cause seeking to join the new tenant (Ada Thana)…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- New York City Housing Authority v. TorresAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1978
- Dulberg v. EbenhartAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979
- Iltit Associates v. SternerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1978
- Albany v. WhiteCivil Court of the City of New York · 1965
- Joseph v. CheeseboroCivil Court of the City of New York · 1964
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Tobias Corp. v. JonesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997