Cubita v. Westchester Furniture Exchange

At the close of the petitioner’s case in the above-entitled summary proceedings, both sides rested, without any proof being put in by respondent tenant, Ramiro Bararo, and this respondent tenant moved to dismiss the proceedings on the dual grounds (a) that petitioner was not authorized to institute the summary proceedings pursuant to subdivision 10 of section 721 of the Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law, and (b) petitioner had not qualified as re*498ceiver by reason of the fact that the bond he filed as receiver was defective in that it was not executed by him nor acknowledged nor was it…