Legal Opinion
La Monica v. Krauss
City of New York Municipal Court
Decided January 28, 1948PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMorris, J.
The tenant appeared specially and moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that section 232-a of the Beal Property Law provides that a thirty-day notice in the city of New York must be served “ in the same manner in which a precept in summary proceedings is now allowed to be served by law ” and that in view of the provision of subdivision l .of section 22 of the New York City Municipal Court Code (L. 1915, ch. 279), that a precept cannot be served by a party to the action and that the landlord in this case having served a thirty days’ notice, that the service is improper and the petition,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Wilder's S. S. Co. v. LowCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1901
- Phillips v. County CommissionersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
- In re the Summary Proceeding Brought by the Stuyvensant Real Estate Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1903
- In re the Estate of DesotelleNew York Surrogate's Court · 1932
3Cited by5 opinions
- Szoboszlay v. GlessnerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1983
- Schultz v. RuizSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1968
- Zamar v. FairCivil Court of the City of New York · 1991
- In re Conquistador Cia. Naviera, S. A.District Court, S.D. New York · 1958
- Sullivan v. WilsonNew York Supreme Court · 1953