Legal Opinion
Clark Operating Corp. v. Yokley
Civil Court of the City of New York
Decided August 9, 1983PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Herbert Kramer, J.
Does a tenant have a duty to terminate a tenancy and vacate premises, in mitigation of damages caused by his landlord’s intentional infliction of emotional harm?
After the verdict of $50,000 in compensatory damages and $15,000 in punitive damages, the jury required mitigation of 60%. The respondent thereupon moved for judgment, absent such mitigation.
In a case of first impression, this court holds that the doctrine of mitigation as an expression of public policy is not applicable at bar.
FACTS
Yokley, the respondent tenant herein, moved into the Clark wing…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Hamilton v. . McPhersonNew York Court of Appeals · 1863
- Den Norske Ameriekalinje Actiesselskabet v. Sun Printing & Publishing Ass'nNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
- Heni Sorkin v. S. LeeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
- Anchorage Independent School District v. StephensAlaska Supreme Court · 1962
- Mari v. StraterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Brockton Savings Bank v. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co., First United Fund, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1985
- Makino, U.S.A., Inc. v. Metlife Capital Credit Corp.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1988
- Leiner v. First Wythe Avenue Service Station, Inc.Civil Court of the City of New York · 1983