Legal Opinion

Barnum v. Fitzpatrick

New York Court of Common Pleas

Decided June 6, 1892Published

Appeal from fifth district court. Action by Sarah A. Barnum and others against John Fitzpatrick, tenant. From a final order awarding the plaintiffs the delivery of the possession of premises known as “320 Stanton Street,” New York, for the nonpayment of rent, defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtBookstaver, J.

When this case was before us upon a former appeal, we fully and at some length examined botli the facts and the law, and it will be unnecessary to do so again, except in so far as the new trial has presented a different state of facts. Upon the second trial all of the correspondence between the attorneys for the respective parties and the orders of the health and fire departments were admitted in evidence, and the return shows that nearly all, if not all, of what was done by the landlords was in consequence of these orders and the tenant’s refusal to comply with them.

First, as to the rear…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. White v. ThurberNew York Supreme Court · 1890
  2. Barnum v. PatrickNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1892

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API