Legal Opinion

Haas v. O'Connell

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided April 7, 1926PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

Judgment unanimously reversed upon the law and new trial granted, with thirty dollars costs to appellant to abide the event.

The court should not have directed a verdict as there were questions of fact in the case and defendant asked to go to the jury. In truth, the court did not determine any question of fact, saying there was none. A tenant who holds over after a term of a year or more may be treated at the option of the landlord either as holding for another year, or as a trespasser. (Kennedy v. City of New York, 196 N. Y. 19, 23; United M. Realty & Imp. Co. v. Roth, 193 id. 570, 576.) But…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Kennedy v. . City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1909
  2. A. Stern & Co. v. Avedon & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1920
  3. A. Stern Company v. . Avedon Company, IncorporatedNew York Court of Appeals · 1921
  4. Greton v. . SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
  5. Smith v. AlltNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1878

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Brown v. Music IncorporatedAlaska Supreme Court · 1961
  2. Kennedy v. KenderianCity of New York Municipal Court · 1946
  3. Franklin-Andrews Corp. v. DeMatteisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1942

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

Powered by the Exa API