Legal Opinion

Coyne v. Silvers

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided May 28, 1946PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Memorandum

2Per curiam

The fact that the landlord desires to engageoin a business similar to that conducted by the tenant does not deprive him of his right to secure possession of the premises where, as in the instant case, he establishes his good faith in seeking such possession for his immediate hnd personal use.

The final order should be reversed, with $30 costs, and final order directed for landlord as prayed for in petition, with costs.

Eder and Hecht, JJ., concur in memorandum Per Curiam; Hammer, J., dissents in the following memorandum: I dissent and vote for affirmance.

Order reversed, etc.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Kristel v. SteinbergCity of New York Municipal Court · 1947
  2. 150 Central Park South, Inc. v. Ritz Carlton Valet Service, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1949